Results 1 to 93 of 93
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nick_M2R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,610

    Move over Saint, there's a new player in town!

    Check Out the New 2009 Raceface Atlas FR cranks

    They look freaking awesome!

    Makes my Blue steel ones look quite dull now....

    "Tired of hollow promises? Light but strong, Atlas FR cranks weigh 40g less than Shimano Saint, while maintaining equal strength and stiffness. Engineered for riders wanting a lightweight FR/DH crank. These cranks are manufactured in Canada using OPTIM-AL, an alloy 20% stronger than 7050 alloy, so no need for pedal inserts.

    Whether dropping in big or vying for a spot on the podium, your prayers have been answered. Atlas FR is the new standard."
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    wait...what?
    Reputation: CaliforniaNicco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    701
    sweet stuff

  3. #3
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Sounds like they're just sore that they can't make hollow-forged cranks. Hope the new RF "x-type" cranks have a better interface than the old taper-lock ones. Stiffer than hollow saint cranks? I find it hard to believe they can approach the stiffness to weight ratio of a hollow-forged design. RF (and truvativ) cranks aren't "bad" (the RF interface leaves a lot to be desired IMO), but you'll never get the same stiffness to weight ratio as a hollow design. Making hollow forged cranks takes some serious machinery though.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    Aaaaaannnnndddd...and, I hope that they are FAR less flexible than the previous iterations of their stuff. Yeah the color is cool, but only for the bling factor crowd. Me, I want function as well as some small bling factor because my bike is not entering a fashion comp lol.

  5. #5
    Premium Member
    Reputation: Ojai Bicyclist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,842
    The BB interface still probably sucks though...

  6. #6
    N* Bomber Crew
    Reputation: Raptordude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,272
    Is that Brett Tippie?

    If so...sold.
    Northstar 2008 Riding Crew

  7. #7
    Living the High Life
    Reputation: Ithnu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    4,535
    I talked to the RF guy at Interbike about these. I told him about my DH team and he said that's exactly what they're designed for. Never heard back from him. Honestly if we had gotten an offer I would definitely give them a try. But in the mean time I'm not sponsored by Shimano, but that's still what I'm using.
    You have just been mentally Rick Roll'd. Yup you're thinking about it right now aren't you? Don't fight it.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LarryFahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Sounds like they're just sore that they can't make hollow-forged cranks. Hope the new RF "x-type" cranks have a better interface than the old taper-lock ones. Stiffer than hollow saint cranks? I find it hard to believe they can approach the stiffness to weight ratio of a hollow-forged design. RF (and truvativ) cranks aren't "bad" (the RF interface leaves a lot to be desired IMO), but you'll never get the same stiffness to weight ratio as a hollow design. Making hollow forged cranks takes some serious machinery though.
    WTF does it matter if they're hollow on the inside, or "hollow" on the outside? It's missing material that makes it lighter. That's it! Did anyone ever see the inside of a hollowtech crankarm? Not Shimanos pics either. Just wondering? I haven't.

    These are DH cranks that go on bikes with 8" of softness front and back. If you can jump on your bike and tell me you can feel the "flex" in the crankarms then you're full of $#!+. How do you know it's not the BB spindle, the suspension, flex in the frame? You're riding a frame made of weaker aluminum (6061) that's less than .050" in the thinnest area of a double or triple butted tube than what the cranks are made of. And they're SOLID aluminum! To say that you feel the cranks flexing is you're imagination being sold to advertising.

    There's some science behind bike components and there's a lot of advertising too. Everything in the bike industry is followed by the "Stronger-and-lighter" quote.
    Is it a coincidence it's in this ad? Nope! FWIW, I looked to see if they used that line after typing it.

    Don't take it personally. I'm *****ing to everyone, but quoting you cause of some of the points you listed.

    Fahn
    Hubbard Bike Club

  9. #9
    Living the High Life
    Reputation: Ithnu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    4,535
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    WTF does it matter if they're hollow on the inside, or "hollow" on the outside? It's missing material that makes it lighter.
    Larger diameter = larger moment reaction arm. With a constant moment your reaction force is smaller. So you get less stress on your bottom bracket and your frame.

    Which again is why I think Shimano is better. However, that doesn't mean I wouldn't give these cranks a try (but I ain't payin' retail bub!). All the theory in the world can't do crap against testing.
    You have just been mentally Rick Roll'd. Yup you're thinking about it right now aren't you? Don't fight it.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nick_M2R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,610
    [QUOTE=Ithnu]Larger diameter = larger moment reaction arm. With a constant moment your reaction force is smaller. So you get less stress on your bottom bracket and your frame.

    QUOTE]

    True , very true

    However i think we need to look at this in a real world situation. People will say that the hollow forged saint is stiffer than the non hollow atlas. Maybe this is true, when the force is in the region of 3500-4500 psi. Subject that kinda force to your body and your dead. I have the atlas FR, my mate has the Saints, and honestly there is no noticable difference in flex or stiffness due to the force on the cranks that a human can generate. I prefer the Atlas FR because im fan of Raceface Products, espically their cranks. never have i had a problem with busted Crank axle interfaces or loosening issues. Muscle them on the first time and ive never needed to touch them again

  11. #11
    Locs on Spokez
    Reputation: Iggz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,902


    It's just better in so many ways.
    Ground Steeze. @iggy_strbac

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nick_M2R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by ilikemybike011


    It's just better in so many ways.
    How bout giving us a real world reason? Not lab condition reason

  13. #13
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Uh oh, Larry Fahn is grumpy again. Sure he'll soon be blowing up on the people in the Pa forum too.

    As far as the RF cranks go, unless they do something about the interface, it will be a no-go. Plenty of dealers and users alike got it about them, that they are not a superior or lateral move from Shimano's cranks. Hell, even Truvativ has a better interface.

  14. #14
    ≈ > ♥
    Reputation: zahgurim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    960
    They could have all the pretty colours in the world, and I still won't run them.

    Why?

    RaceFace's crank/axle/bearing interface system is crap.
    Using that one bolt to both mount the crankarm and preload the bearing is a bunk design, and they are just using pretty colours to cover it up...

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nick_M2R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,610
    hmm.. i just dont understand why everyone has it in for the RF C/A/B interface, i just dont see whats so bad about it. Ive installed multiple RF cranks for my mates, Run 2 pairs meself, and have NEVER had problems with stripped threads, ruined splines or loosening cranks, neither have my buddies cranks. Sure you need a breaker bar to install them the first time but after that, they NEVER give me problems. A bit of extreme pressure grease on the axle taper, loctite on the crankbolt, and bobs your uncle and fannies your aunt, they sit quietly and do their job perfectly. In no way am i panning saints, theyre great cranks, but IMO are more of a pain to set up than RF cranks. Well each to his/her own i spose, i personally will always be running RF stuff caus it never gives me problems, if only they offered the atlas FR in a Straitline blue, id snatch a pair ASAP

    Even still, John Cown, Darren Berrecloth, Paul Bass, lacondeguys and nathan rennie never seem to have a problem with them, and lets face it, they ride harder than most people, myself included.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,688
    Quote Originally Posted by Raptordude
    Is that Brett Tippie?

    If so...sold.
    I think that is Tippie! Woo-hoo!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dowst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,705
    I had RF cranks once and they were always coming loose and making noise.

  18. #18
    Nucking Futs
    Reputation: Sneeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    376
    The only thing really wrong is the bottom bracket bearings. I've replaced mine with some cheapo enduro forkseals and they are ****in'. No problem what so ever with tighting/ loosening crap ever, it's a solid design. Sometimes less is better. I ride a 2006 Atlas btw.
    Amplify Your ®ide!

    Spitfire Amp Scythe

  19. #19
    check your six
    Reputation: sodak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,181
    I also used to run a set of Race Face. Personally, I did not like them. Yes, they came loose often. There is nothing worse than a loose RF crankset on the trail. I don't always carry a 10mm and 8 mm tool with me. Shamino does it right and they always have. It is going to take more than some early 90's color scheme to make me convert. for sure...
    "We can always find excuses if we want to find them, but if we really want to do something, we have to just go."

  20. #20
    Oh, So Interesting!
    Reputation: davec113's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,334
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    WTF does it matter if they're hollow on the inside, or "hollow" on the outside?

    Fahn
    Makes a BIG difference. Here's why:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_moment_of_area

    Notice units are length to the 4th power, so distance from the axis of bending makes a very large difference in stiffness.

    Also, RF thinks they don't need a pedal insert because their aluminum is %20 stronger? Still nowhere close to crmo steel. I bet people riding flat pedals will rip them out of these cranks.

    I'd far prefer Saint cranks.
    .




    Strava: turn off your dork logger when you're not on sanctioned trails.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedal Shop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,132
    Same here (l'm with Sodak).

    Used RF for a really long time back when they made square taper and were good stuff...

    When they moved over to the ISIS design, things started going down hill for me as well as the customers who bought it from us. The list of problems is as long as my arm. Not saying Shimano is trouble free but with Shimano, there's been far few problems, not even close compared to RF.

    The most common problem with Shimano is that little plastic sleeve popping out when doing general maint or swapping parts. Once that sleeve pops out, it's nearly impossible to get it back in without mashing it a little.

    For me, as a dealer, dealing with RF's warranty is just painful... they worse than MarzJokie's warranty dept (oops, can of worms opened).
    Pedalshop.com also on Facebook
    Marin - Transition - Santa Cruz - Cove...

  22. #22
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    WTF does it matter if they're hollow on the inside, or "hollow" on the outside?
    Like I said, strength and stiffness to weight ratio.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  23. #23
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_M2R
    hmm.. i just dont understand why everyone has it in for the RF C/A/B interface, i just dont see whats so bad about it.
    The shimano (and other similer interfaces) are better. Just because you have no problems with the race-face doesn't discount that. The race-face system is a taper-fit and the interface will wear every time you take them on and off, not to mention it takes pretty extreme force to install/remove the cranks. To remove the saints or any other shimano crank is a fast job requiring a minimum of effort due to how they "pinch" the axle. There are basically no bolts that you have to crank down like crazy. The race face system also "preloads" the bearings, which introduces a lot of variability into the system that is just not necessary (loose, too tight, etc). I've ran race-face cranks in the past, and there was nothing "wrong" with them, but the shimano stuff was better, moreso now. The hollow-design is just a more efficient structure (stiffness and strength to weight). Kind of like how a dual-crown fork is a more efficient structure for long travel than a single crown. To provide an equal amount of stiffness and strength, the SC will always be heavier (huge reinforced crown and steerer, etc).
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedal Shop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,132
    chase in point: a couple seasons ago we were building a Transition Bottle Roacket, installing a brand new crankset. Joe Wrench was trying to install the BB but, one side just wouldn't roll in. he tap'd the threads which were fine to begin with, tinker'd a for long time before he noticed the threads were wrong: or incorrectly marked. as if we had two left side cups.

    as you can see in the photo, the right side shell thread are going in the wrong direction.

    It took FOR EVER to get RF to resolve the matter -- even with the photos we sent, they were questioning whether we trying to install it correctly.

    actually, l don't recall if we ever actually got the replacement after we were required to return the messed up unit.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Pedalshop.com also on Facebook
    Marin - Transition - Santa Cruz - Cove...

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: stylie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    555
    First Sunline and now Raceface. I guess powdercoating parts is out for the next couple of years and being replace by the good ol' anodizing. At least Raceface dosen't have the ugly 80 colors going on.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    325
    All other things being = I'd take the hollow tube over the 'H beam' if what I want is torsional stiffness and resistance to bending. Ignoring looks and everything, just engineering...

  27. #27
    GAME ON!
    Reputation: saturnine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,969
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_M2R

    Even still, John Cown, Darren Berrecloth, Paul Bass, lacondeguys and nathan rennie never seem to have a problem with them, and lets face it, they ride harder than most people, myself included.
    and i bet that has nothing at all to do with sponsorship dollars either, right?
    RIP Adam Yauch

    "M.C. for what I AM and do, the A is for Adam and the lyrics; true"

  28. #28
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,826
    pretty funny they compare themselves to Saints.......

    Saints the leader in cranks and brakes !!!
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  29. #29
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedal Shop
    Same here (l'm with Sodak).

    Used RF for a really long time back when they made square taper and were good stuff...

    When they moved over to the ISIS design, things started going down hill for me as well as the customers who bought it from us. The list of problems is as long as my arm. Not saying Shimano is trouble free but with Shimano, there's been far few problems, not even close compared to RF.

    The most common problem with Shimano is that little plastic sleeve popping out when doing general maint or swapping parts. Once that sleeve pops out, it's nearly impossible to get it back in without mashing it a little.

    For me, as a dealer, dealing with RF's warranty is just painful... they worse than MarzJokie's warranty dept (oops, can of worms opened).
    Refreshing to see people in the industry calling things like they are and going to bat for the consumers.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Doc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    418

    I-Beams are weak...

    Take a lid from a cardboard box, some tape and a pair of scissors; and by cutting the lid into three equal length strips, two narrow and one wide; tape them together into a long I-beam.

    Once you have made your I-beam, lets test it:

    Hold one end, with the I-beam horizontal, in the same orientation as if it was a crank arm in either the three o'clock or nine o'clock position. While holding other end away from you, push straight down on the other end, with the force directly toward the center rib of the I-beam structure. Pushing straight down like this, you will notice that it is fairly strong, hence its widespread use in framing tall buildings, where the majority of the load is in line with the center rib of the I-beam.

    Unfortunately for Race Face, this is NOT how a crank arm is loaded. You do not push directly in line with the end of the crank arm. You push on a pedal, that sticks out the SIDE of the crank arm, creating a twisting force.

    So, how well does an I-beam resist twist? To find out, grab the far end of your cardboard I-beam, and try twisting it. Pretty weak and wimpy at resisting force in that direction, isn't it? Notice how easily it twisted?

    Next, grab a tube from a used roll of paper towels. Try twisting that. Notice that it is exponentially stronger in resisting twist than your I-beam was.

    Now you know why nature makes bones, feathers, bamboo and other structures in a tubular shape, rather than in an I-beam shape!
    If more people rode more bikes, more places, more often, the world would be a more better place!

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nick_M2R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by saturnine
    and i bet that has nothing at all to do with sponsorship dollars either, right?
    Meh good point, i actually didnt think of that. Oh well ill always run Raceface, never had a problem with them. Still each to his own, i didnt mean to start a flaming war here

  32. #32
    Bike Ninja |||
    Reputation: chooofoojoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,037
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_M2R
    How bout giving us a real world reason? Not lab condition reason
    Pinch bolt interface. snug those suckers up on the saints. No press fitting and wearing out the interface. I've had a ton of people with wallowed race face interface issues. Zero issues with Shimano cranks. Much better interface in my opinion.

    As a shop rat i've had MILES better customer service with Shimano than Race face too.
    Proud to represent Mojo Wheels.

  33. #33
    BH1
    BH1 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BH1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    188
    they look like XC cranks to me. I'm sure RF did their R&D though. Benefit of the doubt

    How bout that dudes bedazzled jacket!!?!? WTF is that? 20 bucks says he's wearing a florescent yellow fanny-pack and carrying a walk-man... and wearing Skidz.

  34. #34
    GAME ON!
    Reputation: saturnine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,969
    no need for pedal inserts? the saints must be way behind in their r&d then
    RIP Adam Yauch

    "M.C. for what I AM and do, the A is for Adam and the lyrics; true"

  35. #35
    Locs on Spokez
    Reputation: Iggz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,902
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_M2R
    How bout giving us a real world reason? Not lab condition reason
    Alright, real world reason : Shimano cranks are the best on the market.
    Ground Steeze. @iggy_strbac

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    287
    I beam has done well in the seat/post department at least.

    It is just my experiences, or has the Diabolus cranks not had the problems that the other lighter cranksets have had?

  37. #37
    check your six
    Reputation: sodak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,181
    Sorry OP,
    I know you did not intend this thread to be a RF flame fest. IF you like them, get them and rock the sh*t out of them. It is all about personal preferance. I am not riding your bike, you are. Get what you want and enjoy it!
    "We can always find excuses if we want to find them, but if we really want to do something, we have to just go."

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedal Shop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,132
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    Refreshing to see people in the industry calling things like they are and going to bat for the consumers.
    ha ...

    l'm pretty easy going, l fully understand errors happen in the world when it comes to products being made: it's when people who make the product try to put it back on me that we're not doing something right: both MarzJokie and RF pulled this move on me and the guys who work for me.

    The biggest thing that bugs me is when l'll get "oh, gee, we never had this problem happen before" from the warranty depts. That line just boils my blood.

    Been down a road a few times where l had the same problem with a product about 4 times in a row (e.g. left hand crank arms coming off OEM bikes). When l finally got in touch with the company (i.e. talked to a live person not someone's voice mail), someone tells me what l wrote above in bold..

    WTF?!?! out of all the units sold around the country/world, l'm the only one who had this same problem over and over? what's the chances of that?

    The other one that really bugs me is being told to "use it for 10 hours and call us back"...

    Sure, l can see why there's a certain amount of break-in of many products out there but when we know what's wrong from the get go because it's a repeat problem and then we're told to use it for a certain amount of time seems like nothing more than a blow-off or trying to cut corners.

    l won't even go into the phone tag and emails that lack follow up we have to go through with faulty products. The classic (won't name names this time).
    l'll email Joe Sales Rep of Supply Chain with 2 or 3 questions, IF l'm lucky enough to get a reply, they come back with only one answer (to a totally different question). or it'll just be a totally off the wall comment that doesn't help in any way.

    e.g.

    Hey so and so.

    US:
    We're having problems with XYZ, do you think it's ok to do BLA BLA BLA it or should we ABC instead? It's been doing this for a while, we don't want to keep the customer waiting any longer.

    Also, we're seeing bla bla bla happen when we do this... do you think that's ok?


    THEM:

    yeah, you're good to go.



    classic....
    Pedalshop.com also on Facebook
    Marin - Transition - Santa Cruz - Cove...

  39. #39
    AKA shitbird
    Reputation: eabos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Bike Doc
    Take a lid from a cardboard box, some tape and a pair of scissors; and by cutting the lid into three equal length strips, two narrow and one wide; tape them together into a long I-beam.

    Once you have made your I-beam, lets test it:

    Hold one end, with the I-beam horizontal, in the same orientation as if it was a crank arm in either the three o'clock or nine o'clock position. While holding other end away from you, push straight down on the other end, with the force directly toward the center rib of the I-beam structure. Pushing straight down like this, you will notice that it is fairly strong, hence its widespread use in framing tall buildings, where the majority of the load is in line with the center rib of the I-beam.

    Unfortunately for Race Face, this is NOT how a crank arm is loaded. You do not push directly in line with the end of the crank arm. You push on a pedal, that sticks out the SIDE of the crank arm, creating a twisting force.

    So, how well does an I-beam resist twist? To find out, grab the far end of your cardboard I-beam, and try twisting it. Pretty weak and wimpy at resisting force in that direction, isn't it? Notice how easily it twisted?

    Next, grab a tube from a used roll of paper towels. Try twisting that. Notice that it is exponentially stronger in resisting twist than your I-beam was.

    Now you know why nature makes bones, feathers, bamboo and other structures in a tubular shape, rather than in an I-beam shape!

    Great call!
    JRA

  40. #40
    They turned me loose
    Reputation: TheDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    383
    Never had a problem with Race Face cranks or Shimano cranks. Race Face is easier on the wallet, though.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    I dont think he was trying to start a flame war with you or anyone...he was just stating a general assumption, one which happens to be true in this scenario.

    And yes, RF are good and they are getting better but I can state with near 100% confidence that what will be all dressed up on my new beast will be nothing other than the new Saint cranks with Rr Mech and the associated triggers. Not the RFace versions, which is not to say that they are bad...it is just I think that currently they are not the best tool choice to make if one is wanting some serious flex-free performance that has easy assembly and disassembly.

    The new Saints are very hard to beat...just my 2cc's.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_M2R
    Meh good point, i actually didnt think of that. Oh well ill always run Raceface, never had a problem with them. Still each to his own, i didnt mean to start a flaming war here

  42. #42
    Its got what plants crave
    Reputation: Jim311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,934
    As far as the interface problems, how do you guys know that these cranks will be using the RF interface that they have used previously? Or are we just assuming? After using FSA cranks and seeing how easily they set up by comparison, I won't be switching back to RF personally. RF was tough to install AND remove. I think the arguments about the stiffness at pretty irrelevant though. Unless you're a clyde you're unlikely to notice any give in a burly set of cranks.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    377
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    WTF does it matter if they're hollow on the inside, or "hollow" on the outside? It's missing material that makes it lighter. That's it! Did anyone ever see the inside of a hollowtech crankarm? Not Shimanos pics either. Just wondering? I haven't.
    It does matter. If you have a tube and an I beam of the same weight and material, the tube can ALWAYS be made to have greater torsion resistance (twisting about its long axis) assuming they have similar properties (end load stiffness, IE bending in the normal direction).
    That said, it seems likely that you can't make some materials into hollow cranks as easily as others, so I-beams may be an ideal design for some materials.

    And yes, I have seen inside of hollowtech arms. Its pretty common because Shimano had sales displays where they machined away part of a hollowtek crank. Pretty nice design, and very clean inside. If your shop doesn't have one of the displays, they should cut open an arm they were gonna toss- its a really good selling point.

    There's a reason bones are tubes instead of I-beams...

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    70
    Price?
    2008 Transition Dirtbag w/Totem

  45. #45
    sixsixtysix
    Guest
    I have a set of these on order in the 83mm version for a proto build. We'll see if I am able to break them, seeing as how I broke a pair of Diabolus

  46. #46
    Oh, So Interesting!
    Reputation: davec113's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Fungazi
    It does matter. If you have a tube and an I beam of the same weight and material, the tube can ALWAYS be made to have greater torsion resistance (twisting about its long axis) assuming they have similar properties (end load stiffness, IE bending in the normal direction).
    That said, it seems likely that you can't make some materials into hollow cranks as easily as others, so I-beams may be an ideal design for some materials.

    And yes, I have seen inside of hollowtech arms. Its pretty common because Shimano had sales displays where they machined away part of a hollowtek crank. Pretty nice design, and very clean inside. If your shop doesn't have one of the displays, they should cut open an arm they were gonna toss- its a really good selling point.

    There's a reason bones are tubes instead of I-beams...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_moment_of_inertia

    ...although I'm not sure how much a crankarm sees torsion. I think it would see a lot more bending than torsion....
    .




    Strava: turn off your dork logger when you're not on sanctioned trails.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    325
    Torsional moments on cranks arms are typically no more than half the bending moments, ever. Unless you run pedals with a 175mm platform, in which case they could be even if you placed your feet on the outside edge.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LarryFahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,897
    Great! Now we're comparing cardboard to aluminum instead of an aluminum crank arm to another aluminum crank arm. They're flexy, they bend, Look at Wikipedia and see what they say... How about you compare them outside the computer and sales pitch. I don't think Shimano or RaceFace does their research from Wikipedia.

    As far as flex? How about those 1/4" thick pedals? You're trying to tell me that a crank that's 3/4" thick will have noticeable flex, but your pedals are solid? Right......

    I remember 2003-04 RF BB's sucked ass and wouldn't last longer than 2 months. I'm not pushing RF over the other, but to say shimano never has problems and their CS is top notch? I've had my issues with XTR stuff back when it was strong and meant to be ridden aggressively. 3 months and they still had my cranks and BB(coincidentally)? No warranty or anything. The problem was both crank arms would fall in a downward motion when weight was applied. The area on the crank where the BB splines went was machined too big. The LX arms I used to replace them worked fine.

    Since that issue I've used RF and FSA with no problems. You can use whatever you want.

    I machine pipes that are used for drilling into the ground. Some of these pipes are only .050" thick sidewalls after the threading process. Yet can handle hundreds of ft/lbs of torque after getting heat treated. Fahn
    Hubbard Bike Club

  49. #49
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    As far as flex? How about those 1/4" thick pedals? You're trying to tell me that a crank that's 3/4" thick will have noticeable flex, but your pedals are solid? Right......
    No, not right. You are still missing the point. The point about the hollow structure is the stiffness and strength to weight. You're not using solid metal slugs to drill, they are hollow. Race Face doesn't use a solid-axle, it's also hollow. Then we get to crank arms. The I-beam and other associated crank-shapes work ok, but they are not going to have the stiffness and strength to weight ratio of the hollow design. So either you're carring around a lot more weight than you need to achieve the same stiffness, or you are sacrificing the stiffness. You are right that no one is going to really notice the difference in stiffness, so in that sense I'd rather have the lighter set, but I don't believe race face's claims for one minute, as their structure and interface is simply not as good.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    So FAR at least at any rate...!

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LarryFahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    You are right that no one is going to really notice the difference in stiffness, so in that sense I'd rather have the lighter set, but I don't believe race face's claims for one minute, as their structure and interface is simply not as good.
    That's my main point. No one will notice the difference in stiffness with all that suspension on a DH bike. As far as the pedals stripping out? We'll wait and see. Fahn
    Hubbard Bike Club

  52. #52
    not a forum admin
    Reputation: atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by davec113

    Also, RF thinks they don't need a pedal insert because their aluminum is %20 stronger? Still nowhere close to crmo steel. I bet people riding flat pedals will rip them out of these cranks.

    I'd far prefer Saint cranks.
    i've been on the atlas FR cranks for about a season now and haven't had any issues with the cranks not having pedal inserts.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: HANKg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    222
    [QUOTE=Nick_M2R]
    Quote Originally Posted by Ithnu
    Larger diameter = larger moment reaction arm. With a constant moment your reaction force is smaller. So you get less stress on your bottom bracket and your frame.

    QUOTE]

    True , very true

    However i think we need to look at this in a real world situation. People will say that the hollow forged saint is stiffer than the non hollow atlas. Maybe this is true, when the force is in the region of 3500-4500 psi. Subject that kinda force to your body and your dead. I have the atlas FR, my mate has the Saints, and honestly there is no noticable difference in flex or stiffness due to the force on the cranks that a human can generate. I prefer the Atlas FR because im fan of Raceface Products, espically their cranks. never have i had a problem with busted Crank axle interfaces or loosening issues. Muscle them on the first time and ive never needed to touch them again

    Just to clarify.....psi can represent a stress or a pressure. A force would be in units of lbs(or lbf, pounds of force if you want it technical).
    Waitin on the weekend

  54. #54
    not a forum admin
    Reputation: atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    The shimano (and other similer interfaces) are better. Just because you have no problems with the race-face doesn't discount that. The race-face system is a taper-fit and the interface will wear every time you take them on and off, not to mention it takes pretty extreme force to install/remove the cranks. .
    You've not installed a newer raceface crankset have you? Cause the '08 Atlas FR cranks I've been using for the best season aren't taper-fit.

  55. #55
    not a forum admin
    Reputation: atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedal Shop
    chase in point: a couple seasons ago we were building a Transition Bottle Roacket, installing a brand new crankset. Joe Wrench was trying to install the BB but, one side just wouldn't roll in. he tap'd the threads which were fine to begin with, tinker'd a for long time before he noticed the threads were wrong: or incorrectly marked. as if we had two left side cups.

    as you can see in the photo, the right side shell thread are going in the wrong direction.

    It took FOR EVER to get RF to resolve the matter -- even with the photos we sent, they were questioning whether we trying to install it correctly.

    actually, l don't recall if we ever actually got the replacement after we were required to return the messed up unit.
    That is pretty funny. Like buying a pair of shoes and getting two lefts!

  56. #56
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Quote Originally Posted by atomicAdam
    You've not installed a newer raceface crankset have you? Cause the '08 Atlas FR cranks I've been using for the best season aren't taper-fit.
    Ok, only talk if you know what you're talking about. Your cranks use the "x-type crank bolt" to secure the crank on the spindle. When you do this it tightens down the tapered fit. Then there's the extractor-fitting that allows you to "pull" the cranks. If you're cranks were not taper-fit, then you wouldn't need an extractor and when you loosened the "x-type bolt" the cranks would simply come off. This is not the case and the race face cranks are exactly like the old shimano octalink and square-tapered cranks in this respect (how they are secured). Just because the race face cranks use a splined axle doesn't mean that they aren't still a taper-fit. If they were not, they'd use pinch bolts to secure the cranks to the axle (which they do not). I have installed the race face duesh cranks within 2 years, and evidently that is close enough, as I just reviewed the atlas FR instructions.
    Last edited by Jayem; 03-30-2009 at 09:25 PM.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    The 08 RF cranks that came with the 08 GRXO were very flexy...could I feel that, YES!!!!!

    The bearing covers were poorly designed and do not do the job very well and one of which fell off after the first run. Why did it crack, well the manner in which they are put on leaves alot to be desired of in terms of a more perfect and exacting fit and one that does not put any pressure on other parts. The self extracting bolt is not one that I am a fan of at all.

    So the first bearing cover on the BB's bearing casing came off, the cranks were good but yes, they did flex and it is not something that you can say, "Hey Bob, look these cranks flex...boing...boing...boing"! Its something you can feel over a progressive amount of time (albiet a short time of riding) as you are really pushing it and I felt the immediate difference upon tooling up with the XT crank set. As soon as I put the power down and landed the first double, reamed the first berm while tramping the undergrowth with my wild trail antics, you can feel the difference progressively. Are the RF cranks bad...no! Would I race with them...NO, not yet at any rate.

    I have only tested the newer more contemporary RF ware very superficially so it is not fare to comment so...I will not comment there.

    The RF brand in itself is a great brand and one in which they have come along way in just a very short period of time...they still have far much more to grow and mature as a brand. Yet in saying that, I currently would buy there stuff for simply "turfing" around the place. Yet, for a more high end ride or parts, I think they are not quite there at this point in time and yes...the Saint crank KILLS the RF in all manner of regards and if you had a RF crank set up on the exact same bike juxtaposing the Saints, yes, of course you would feel some serious difference.

    Now in the context of FEELING the "flex", we are talking very small amounts here and not in the manner of massive i-beam-twisting incriments either, but more NOTICABLE amounts. Case in point: if crank flex was so..."not a noticable thing" or so unoticable, we would not be talking about it here and it would never have been an issue in the first place, yet....{

    But as it stand, it does and crank flex is a thing that can, is and will be quantifiable, especially in extreme scenarios where that flex is an unwanted event. From my quantifiable point of view, the RF cranks are good but they are too flexy at the moment hence, I chose the Saints in the FR/ DH catagory and I used the FRide RFace cranks for 6months before dissmembering them for the XT cranks with very obvious differences. I myself, am not the only person to quantify this apparent...........thing.

    Pedel inserts on my RFCranks were fine, BB was NOT fine and enither was the system they employed. The bearings were toast after month, crank arms were fine and took a serious beating but they had a bit too much flex for my liking if I can state things in such simple terms.
    Last edited by Sim2u; 03-31-2009 at 12:40 AM.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Ok, only talk if you know what you're talking about. Your cranks use the "x-type crank bolt" to secure the crank on the spindle. When you do this it tightens down the tapered fit. Then there's the extractor-fitting that allows you to "pull" the cranks. If you're cranks were not taper-fit, then you wouldn't need an extractor and when you loosened the "x-type bolt" the cranks would simply come off. This is not the case and the race face cranks are exactly like the old shimano octalink and square-tapered cranks in this respect (how they are secured). Just because the race face cranks use a splined axle doesn't mean that they aren't still a taper-fit. If they were not, they'd use pinch bolts to secure the cranks to the axle (which they do not). I have installed the race face duesh cranks within 2 years, and evidently that is close enough, as I just reviewed the atlas FR instructions.

    ding ding ding - correct sir - for sure the 09 RF are taper fit. Maybe adams were worn out so they didnt seem like a taper

  59. #59
    Meh.
    Reputation: XSL_WiLL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    17,509
    Truvativ claimed to not need a BB with the OCT cranks because it uses a harder alloy. I've still seen and heard of people rip the pedal threads out of those.

    I've always said this. The RaceFace crank/spindle interface leaves a lot to be desired. It is certainly still a taper fit. And it does wear out.

    I'll take the 40g weight penalty of the Saints for a crank that is stronger, stiffer, easier to work with, and does not develop play.

  60. #60
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    That's my main point. No one will notice the difference in stiffness with all that suspension on a DH bike. As far as the pedals stripping out? We'll wait and see. Fahn
    Folks also have to understand that Larry is one of those full rigid purists and hates and goes as far as bitterly flaming bikers that came after him and are on new "fangled" technology. I guess this is his once a year lashing out senselessly against fellow bikers. I guess it's better here than against his fellow Pa riders, as is the normal case.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    Gargantuan +1 there Will

    Quote Originally Posted by XSL_WiLL
    Truvativ claimed to not need a BB with the OCT cranks because it uses a harder alloy. I've still seen and heard of people rip the pedal threads out of those.

    I've always said this. The RaceFace crank/spindle interface leaves a lot to be desired. It is certainly still a taper fit. And it does wear out.

    I'll take the 40g weight penalty of the Saints for a crank that is stronger, stiffer, easier to work with, and does not develop play.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    Folks also have to understand that Larry is one of those full rigid purists and hates and goes as far as bitterly flaming bikers that came after him and are on new "fangled" technology. I guess this is his once a year lashing out senselessly against fellow bikers. I guess it's better here than against his fellow Pa riders, as is the normal case.
    he he he................................................ ...

  63. #63
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    Saint and SLX/(SLXAM) are pretty much the best things going right now. I'm not a Shimano guy and swore off them some years ago, but I would have no problems with using their cranks now. They are really damn good.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sim2u
    he he he................................................ ...
    Yeah, not that bad about full rigid, but he goes off the handle sometimes, especially about telemarketers and his fellow Pa homies. I don't know if it's the water, or what, but the other Pa guy is off his rocker a lot, too.
    Last edited by Jerk_Chicken; 03-31-2009 at 01:10 AM.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    Can only agree with you there...I think many peeps were slightly going off Shimano but not due to quality...more their...well how shall we say it ________.

  65. #65
    Living the High Life
    Reputation: Ithnu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    4,535
    [QUOTE=HANKg]
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_M2R


    Just to clarify.....psi can represent a stress or a pressure. A force would be in units of lbs(or lbf, pounds of force if you want it technical).
    The force over the area on your bottom bracket then. Its a linear relationship so convert as you see fit. If there was no area for the force you'd have infinite stress. So it goes without saying that the result of this type of force will be a stress on the material since your bottom bracket, frame, etc does have surface area.

    And the stress being referred to is a direct result of force application. In this case we're comparing stiffness, or more accurately the displacement, based on the force input. So using force to compare the stiffness is very valid actually. The stiffness will determine what your displacement is at the pedal relative to the frame as well as how the force is transmitted to the rest of the frame at the bottom bracket.

    The stress in the crank arm is a separate analysis from the frame and from the displacement of the pedal relative to the frame. You could fail the frame or the arm separately. The bottom bracket interface will determine displacement as well. A very stiff crank arm could have a large pedal displacement just because the BB interface flexes too much.

    Complicated things mechanisms.
    Last edited by Ithnu; 03-31-2009 at 07:15 AM.
    You have just been mentally Rick Roll'd. Yup you're thinking about it right now aren't you? Don't fight it.

  66. #66
    not a forum admin
    Reputation: atomicAdam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    599
    I've got two pairs - they were both as easy to remove and install as any crank i've used with pinch bolts. so, maybe they are 'taper-fit', they don't act like it. I've pulled mine at least 5 times this past season and re-installed and have had not issues with the x-type bolt and the cranks loosening up. So, you sir, should speak from experience instead of just being an arm chair parts basher.

  67. #67
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    However, YOU not having problems doesn't nullify the problems multiple people, on and off forum, have had, which also includes a list of dealers who no longer recommend these parts.

  68. #68
    sixsixtysix
    Guest
    They did do something different on their spline interface.

    I had a set of 2006 Diabolus, and actually managed to fully destroy the splines to the point the crank arms were no longer straight with one another.

    No questions asked from Race Face when it happened in 2008, they sent me a new set of crank arms and I could tell there was a difference in tolerances just from installing them.

    Since then, they have been removed and re-installed at least a half dozen times without any problems with them loosening and they install just as tight as the first time.

    I also run XT's on my other bike, so I know the differences between the Shimano and Race Face interface, and while it is physically easier to install/remove, I don't notice any difference between the 2 when it comes to durability other than that plastic threaded star nut on the XT's sucks (Saints are aluminum)

  69. #69
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    20
    Shimano does have one of the strongest/lightest cranks out there. Shimano cold forges their cranks opposed to machining their cranks. Forged metal is much stronger then machined metal. When the metal is pounded the grains within the metal deform and follow the shape of the part that is being pounded out. Therefore the grains in the metal are never broken down resulting in a higher strength to weight ratio.

    If you're looking for the strongest yet lightest components, go with forged made not machined.

  70. #70
    Bikes Rule
    Reputation: Demo-9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,133
    The RF cranks look like Kooka cranks from the late 90's.

    I only use 2 cranks - Shimano and Profile. Running Saints and Hones on my FR bikes and Profiles on the DJ bikes. Never again will I use anything different. Shimano has the best interface set-up of all MTB cranks.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 53119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,285
    So you guys are saying that 60% of the time RF works everytime, right? The only trouble free product I've ever used that came in more than one color is my King hs. Very heated thread...fun to read though...

  72. #72
    Oh, So Interesting!
    Reputation: davec113's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,334
    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn
    I don't think Shimano or RaceFace does their research from Wikipedia.
    Maybe not, but you could sure learn something from Wikipedia
    .




    Strava: turn off your dork logger when you're not on sanctioned trails.

  73. #73
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Quote Originally Posted by AZHardTailer
    Shimano does have one of the strongest/lightest cranks out there. Shimano cold forges their cranks opposed to machining their cranks. Forged metal is much stronger then machined metal. When the metal is pounded the grains within the metal deform and follow the shape of the part that is being pounded out. Therefore the grains in the metal are never broken down resulting in a higher strength to weight ratio.

    If you're looking for the strongest yet lightest components, go with forged made not machined.
    Um, pretty sure the Race Face cranks are forged, and have been for quite some time. They are machined as well, but that is just the finishing. Back up there quite a ways in this thread I said there was nothing "wrong" with the crank arms, same goes for newer truvativ stuff that isn't the soft-butter of their first-generation stuff, but the real point was the stiffness and strength to weight of the hollow forged design coupled with a better interface on the compenting saint cranks. I use shimano on two bikes, but holzfellers on the other. The holzfellers are absolute tanks with their giga-howitzer-patriot-whatever BB system, but they work and are solid (they are taper-fit too). If I had the cash I'd have SLX on there.
    Last edited by Jayem; 03-31-2009 at 01:02 PM.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    Quote Originally Posted by atomicAdam
    I've got two pairs - they were both as easy to remove and install as any crank i've used with pinch bolts. so, maybe they are 'taper-fit', they don't act like it. I've pulled mine at least 5 times this past season and re-installed and have had not issues with the x-type bolt and the cranks loosening up. So, you sir, should speak from experience instead of just being an arm chair parts basher.
    1) All the RF cranks are a taper fit, and the differing metal properties leads to wearing on the 'softer' material ie the arms.

    2) I went through 4 sets (2 diabolus, 2 atlas) that failed at the interface, not from riding, but from removal, install cycles. Each and every set failed after 4 or so install/removal cycles. RF was great about warranty for me, and assured me each time that they had corrected the tollerances.... I now only run pinch bolt type cranks.

    The funny thing IMO is this exact same design was tried and failed 20 years ago. The first gen redline cranks were build with the same idea, and all failed, to be replaced with the gen 2 versions with pinch bolts....

  75. #75
    Build More = Ride More
    Reputation: YoPawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim311
    As far as the interface problems, how do you guys know that these cranks will be using the RF interface that they have used previously? Or are we just assuming? After using FSA cranks and seeing how easily they set up by comparison, I won't be switching back to RF personally. RF was tough to install AND remove. I think the arguments about the stiffness at pretty irrelevant though. Unless you're a clyde you're unlikely to notice any give in a burly set of cranks.
    Being able to remove the cranks is huge for on the trail.

    I've had a couple of times where my chain guide got bend to hell and my Hone cranks made it possible to take them off and fix it. RF or Truvativ cranks would have been a walk out of the woods.

    Hopefully they got smart and switched.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fixbikeguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    561
    [QUOTE=Jayem]Ok, only talk if you know what you're talking about. Your cranks use the "x-type crank bolt" to secure the crank on the spindle. When you do this it tightens down the tapered fit. Then there's the extractor-fitting that allows you to "pull" the cranks. If you're cranks were not taper-fit, then you wouldn't need an extractor and when you loosened the "x-type bolt" the cranks would simply come off. This is not the case and the race face cranks are exactly like the old shimano octalink and square-tapered cranks in this respect (how they are secured). Just because the race face cranks use a splined axle doesn't mean that they aren't still a taper-fit. If they were not, they'd use pinch bolts to secure the cranks to the axle (which they do not). I have installed the race face duesh cranks within 2 years, and evidently that is close enough, as I just reviewed the atlas FR instructions.[/QUOTE

    Profiles and many other cranks are not tapered fit and require an extractor, and lots of force to install them. No pinch bolts there either. I agree with the Race Face's having a tapered spline, just watch what you say...there are always exceptions.

  77. #77
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Um, pretty sure the Race Face cranks are forged, and have been for quite some time. They are machined as well, but that is just the finishing. Back up there quite a ways in this thread I said there was nothing "wrong" with the crank arms, same goes for newer truvativ stuff that isn't the soft-butter of their first-generation stuff, but the real point was the stiffness and strength to weight of the hollow forged design coupled with a better interface on the compenting saint cranks. I use shimano on two bikes, but holzfellers on the other. The holzfellers are absolute tanks with their giga-howitzer-patriot-whatever BB system, but they work and are solid (they are taper-fit too). If I had the cash I'd have SLX on there.

    Hmmm don't think I ever wrote RF cranks aren't forged... Some RF cranks are forged only, some forged and machined, I believe the Diabolus is just cnc machined (could be wrong), and some molded...different techniques for different purposes. How Shimano gets their hollow-tech technology for their unique strength to weight ratio is in their cold forging process. (how they actually get the 'hollow' part is their little secret they do not let out) Cold forging is a different style of forging and results in a stronger strength to weight ratio. They have a large part of their main factory dedicated to this process...huge machines going boom, shaking the enitre factory floors to the point someone would think they are in another mighty Japanese earthquake.

    Other then that, again comes down to everyone riding what works for them which would be what is a stiff enough crank arm and mounting interface that makes you happy and not cussing angry. I personally don't ride RF or Shimano cranks, have my own preference that has a wonderful interface and stiff enough crank arms without the excessive cost of having hollowtech technology.

  78. #78
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Quote Originally Posted by fixbikeguy

    Profiles and many other cranks are not tapered fit and require an extractor, and lots of force to install them. No pinch bolts there either. I agree with the Race Face's having a tapered spline, just watch what you say...there are always exceptions.
    I'll keep that in mind when we have a thread about something other than race face.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  79. #79
    Proud lame eBiker
    Reputation: Internal14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,641
    [QUOTE=Pedal Shop]ha ...
    The biggest thing that bugs me is when l'll get "oh, gee, we never had this problem happen before" from the warranty depts. That line just boils my blood. [QUOTE=Pedal Shop}


    Doooode....tell me about it! It's fricken hilarious when teh same rep tells you that line of BS after the third warranty call about the same item failing. It's like, "Hey, dum bass, you told me that last month. You think I don't have a brain?!"

    Gets me EVERY time. grrrr....bike company reps and their not owning up to having issues with their over-promised products.
    www.velocitybicycles.comWhere customers become friends, not simply a dollar sign.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by AZHardTailer
    Hmmm don't think I ever wrote RF cranks aren't forged... Some RF cranks are forged only, some forged and machined, I believe the Diabolus is just cnc machined (could be wrong), and some molded...different techniques for different purposes. How Shimano gets their hollow-tech technology for their unique strength to weight ratio is in their cold forging process. (how they actually get the 'hollow' part is their little secret they do not let out) Cold forging is a different style of forging and results in a stronger strength to weight ratio. They have a large part of their main factory dedicated to this process...huge machines going boom, shaking the enitre factory floors to the point someone would think they are in another mighty Japanese earthquake.

    Other then that, again comes down to everyone riding what works for them which would be what is a stiff enough crank arm and mounting interface that makes you happy and not cussing angry. I personally don't ride RF or Shimano cranks, have my own preference that has a wonderful interface and stiff enough crank arms without the excessive cost of having hollowtech technology.

    Cold forging doesn't have any advantages over hot forging or isothermal forging. I have seen the earlier "hollow forged" Shimanos and they were a two piece welded design, they may have changed, but I doubt it. I used to make the forgings for the RaceFace cranks that had the carbon inserts and the XC ones. We used the same forging process and heat treating that we used for aerospace products. If it's good enough for the stresses produced in an aircraft (airplane, helicopter, or rocket) it's more than good enough for us flying thru the air on our bikes.

  81. #81
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by IRTGU
    Cold forging doesn't have any advantages over hot forging or isothermal forging. I have seen the earlier "hollow forged" Shimanos and they were a two piece welded design, they may have changed, but I doubt it. I used to make the forgings for the RaceFace cranks that had the carbon inserts and the XC ones. We used the same forging process and heat treating that we used for aerospace products. If it's good enough for the stresses produced in an aircraft (airplane, helicopter, or rocket) it's more than good enough for us flying thru the air on our bikes.

    Beats the hell out of me really... I was just going off of info from someone I know that was a product manager for Shimano for many many many years. Other then that, was enjoying one of my more 'smart' feeling moments...thanks man! hahaha!

    peace

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nick_M2R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,610
    Whoa !!
    I had know idea this would cause such heated debate!
    So reading through these posts, it seems to me that people only hate the crank interface?
    So if raceface moved to a pinch bolt system, you people wouldnt give RF such a bashing?
    Oh well each person to their own opinion
    ill still run em caus they anit given me troubles yet.

  83. #83
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,466
    One problem is the interface. Other problems aren't so prominent, so likely, I would give them a pass if they fixed the interface. The other stuff simply has to do with the QC and CS. Then there's simply the misleading comparative advertising.

    I use "inferior" Truvative Stylos on both our bikes with no issues. I wanted SLX, but it was not available at the time I needed them. RF was not even a consideration.

  84. #84
    Living the High Life
    Reputation: Ithnu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    4,535
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick_M2R
    So reading through these posts, it seems to me that people only hate the crank interface?
    That my biggest issue with all other cranksets. The Shimano interface is just too darn nice not to use.
    You have just been mentally Rick Roll'd. Yup you're thinking about it right now aren't you? Don't fight it.

  85. #85
    Build More = Ride More
    Reputation: YoPawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Ithnu
    That my biggest issue with all other cranksets. The Shimano interface is just too darn nice not to use.
    I've been running FSA Gravity cranks on my Dh bike too. Work just as well as the Shimanos.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LarryFahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    Saint and SLX/(SLXAM) are pretty much the best things going right now. I'm not a Shimano guy and swore off them some years ago, but I would have no problems with using their cranks now. They are really damn good.

    Yeah, not that bad about full rigid, but he goes off the handle sometimes, especially about telemarketers and his fellow Pa homies. I don't know if it's the water, or what, but the other Pa guy is off his rocker a lot, too.

    It's great to have my own personal troll. I get him to follow me everywhere. If he doesn't follow me on his 29er I just yank on the leash and he comes... Eventually. But hey, I'm glad he corrects everything I post. Ya know 14,000 post is a good sign of a mechanic. Like I said in the past, Wikipedia has made some people geniuses! If any of that's wrong Jerk, ya know... Correct me. Hugs and kisses. Fahn

    Ps. I'm going to the PA forums if you're looking for me.
    Hubbard Bike Club

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sim2u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    2,331
    OK...now...you KNOW some unamed person is going to call you on the prompt for photos about this, don't you!? He he he of course, I'm not saying it's me...SOMBODY!


    Quote Originally Posted by sixsixtysix
    I have a set of these on order in the 83mm version for a proto build. We'll see if I am able to break them, seeing as how I broke a pair of Diabolus

  88. #88
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,224
    Quote Originally Posted by fixbikeguy
    It sounded like you were saying that in general if you have no pinch bolts then you have a tapered axle. Sorry if you weren't clear.
    Yeah, as a bike-shop mechanic I know other systems are out there, and I've worked on such systems, so it would be dogmatic to make that an absolute statement, sorry if it seemed that way. I was only referring to how the race-face cranks work.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fixbikeguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    561
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    I'll keep that in mind when we have a thread about something other than race face.

    It sounded like you were saying that in general if you have no pinch bolts then you have a tapered axle. Sorry if you weren't clear.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    427
    ive run both old and new style saints. love em.. not a bad word about them either.

    i now run the new 2010 RF atlas FR.

    tbh, i dont feel them flex or give, they simply work.

    what i dislike is that they take ages and those huge ass unbraco keys to sort out

    what im getting at is, once im riding, i dont really feel any difference in them.

    used to ride diabolus too never had any issues.

    the one thing i do make sure to do from day one riding the RF ones, exchange the BB with a shimano one.. usually i just stick on some XTs as they seem to hold up just fine, and dont break my wallet in half

  91. #91
    DenverDH'er
    Reputation: rep_1969's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,156
    Wtf??

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    156
    back from the dead.....

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,920
    This thread did not go into the light


Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •