FSA K-Force Light (2x9): 712g- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 28 of 28
  1. #1
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    FSA K-Force Light (2x9): 712g

    here's detailed weights on the FSA K-Force light crankset:

    complete crankset including BB and 3 spacer rings, 44/29 chainrings, 175mm lenght: 512g
    BB: 99g
    44t chainring: 101g
    29t chainring: 26g

    complete set without chainrings: 580g

    FRM rings would save huge chunks of weight!!! i can't understand the guys at FSA for mounting these fat Pizzas
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559
    They look very nice.

    The funny thing is FSA sponsors this sub-forum too!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Treybiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,041
    I wish someone offered a 32 or 34 tooth chain ring for them. They would be perfect on an SS with the better chain line. I'll be running the standard ones on my SS with a 32 on them.

  4. #4
    Now broadcasting from CO
    Reputation: PAmtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,223
    I wish I could get that in the US now...
    Brought to you by rocks.

  5. #5
    2006 sswc RockStar
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    928
    what size BCD are they, never seen a 29t c/ring on a 4 bolt before.............

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by RockStarRacing
    what size BCD are they, never seen a 29t c/ring on a 4 bolt before.............

    it is their own standard, you won't be able to put after market rings on

  7. #7
    Now broadcasting from CO
    Reputation: PAmtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,223
    Quote Originally Posted by RockStarRacing
    what size BCD are they, never seen a 29t c/ring on a 4 bolt before.............
    It's a 94/58mm BCD.
    Brought to you by rocks.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by PAmtbiker
    It's a 94/58mm BCD.
    its a 94mm 4 arm, there is no granny therefore no 58.
    i dont think anybody else offers 4 arm 94mm yet.

  9. #9
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,006
    Quote Originally Posted by PAmtbiker
    I wish I could get that in the US now...
    They are
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Some Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,482
    Sweet looking cranks and nice weight, but I've got to ask; how does 100.2gr round up to 101?
    www.yourtrails.net/weights/ - Kick ass weights listing
    racing.thylacinecycles.com - Racing silliness

  11. #11
    Team Captain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,322
    Serious pain in the ass to deal with all the new BCD standards everyone is coming up with (Zipp, Rotor, XTR M960) when it comes to replacement rings! Looks like I'll be taking the dremel to those giant rings when I get my set...

  12. #12
    bang
    Reputation: Cyco-Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,290
    ok, but how much do they cost compared to other lightweight cranksets?

    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i can't understand the guys at FSA for mounting these fat Pizzas
    haha! yea, what's the deal with those things? they don't do that on any of their other chainrings...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    572
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyco-Dude
    ok, but how much do they cost compared to other lightweight cranksets?


    haha! yea, what's the deal with those things? they don't do that on any of their other chainrings...
    Yes they do. Check out the new road crank (K Force Light), same style rings.

  14. #14
    adn
    adn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    25
    I'd go for the 3x9 verson and mount TA 28t granny/42t middle instead. Probably lighter as well and more ideal for big ring-mashers like myself...

  15. #15
    Tech geek and racerboy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    651

    Fat rings...

    Check out the new XTR rings. How about high-end road offerings from SRAM, FSA, Shimano, etc. All those rings are thick chunks of metal with one thing in mind: rigidity. It may not hold too much weight (no pun intended, honestly) on this particular forum, but the extra rigidity in the rings does improve shifting performance, especially when paired with the beefy front mechs these companies are making, and especially if you're shifting under load. If you're not too concerned with that small increase in performance, by all means go ahead and save some weight on the rings. I for one appreciate the extra snap in my front shifting, and I really like the look of the new FSA 2x9 setup. Even with the relatively heavy BB and chainrings, it's still a pretty respectable weight, and the improved shifting and chainline of a double would be wicked awesome. I never use the damned granny anyway, especially when I race.

    Too bad I have an annoying propensity to shred the ends of carbon cranksets on every rock in sight...
    A hardtail is forever

  16. #16
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770
    Quote Originally Posted by adn
    I'd go for the 3x9 verson and mount TA 28t granny/42t middle instead. Probably lighter as well and more ideal for big ring-mashers like myself...
    there is no 28t for 4-bolt - not even 29t.
    the smallest you can get with 104mm 4-bolt pattern is the 30t from Extralite.

    and rest assured the 3-ring FSA is a lot heavier than the double!

  17. #17
    Ole
    Ole is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,104
    Quote Originally Posted by Nino
    there is no 28t for 4-bolt - not even 29t.
    He said 28t granny, 42t middle. That would give you better chainline as well.


    Ole.

  18. #18
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Ole
    He said 28t granny, 42t middle. That would give you better chainline as well.


    Ole.
    ah i see.

    BUT this won't give you a better chainline. the chainrings would be too far inward!
    and it would get you an ugly looking crankset as well.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    876
    the old standard for xc cranksets chainline was 47.5mm. with the current external bearing cranksets the chainline standard is 50mm, measured from the middle ring of a triple crankset.

    if you run a granny/middle 2x9 setup on an external bearing crankset the result is a 47.5mm chainline (measured to the mid-point between the two rings in a double setup), back to the old standard. i hardly call that too narrow.

    so doing that solves the chainline issues of external bearing cranksets, but not the q-factor one which is why i haven't gone there yet.

  20. #20
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559
    Time to find some NOS square taper bottom brackets and some old school NOS cranks?

  21. #21
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Cheers!
    Time to find some NOS square taper bottom brackets and some old school NOS cranks?
    Middleburn? They offer square taper and 94/58bcd. I have a NOS American Classic Ti BB in the Kona that the new Middleburn CS will be going on but I'll be running triple. Phil Wood makes the best Ti square taper BB, IMO. If you are not too picky about weight on your BB there are lots of spindle width choices in XT-level square taper bottom brakets to dial in your chain line. XT square taper bottom brakets also never wear out.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  22. #22
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,559
    Quote Originally Posted by Axis II
    Middleburn? They offer square taper and 94/58bcd. I have a NOS American Classic Ti BB in the Kona that the new Middleburn CS will be going on but I'll be running triple. Phil Wood makes the best Ti square taper BB, IMO. If you are not too picky about weight on your BB there are lots of spindle width choices in XT-level square taper bottom brakets to dial in your chain line. XT square taper bottom brakets also never wear out.
    I know Tune makes cranksets that still use the old square taper method. One day if I decide to get my Titanium custom built kent eriksson hardtail I'll get a nice square taper BB and some nice tune double crankset with a 30tooth middle and a nice 42tooth big ring. Till then I need to figure out how to finish my Kona build. Missing still is a fork, tune hubs, some nice sun ringle rims, and bunch of spokes.

  23. #23
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Cheers!
    I know Tune makes cranksets that still use the old square taper method. One day if I decide to get my Titanium custom built kent eriksson hardtail I'll get a nice square taper BB and some nice tune double crankset with a 30tooth middle and a nice 42tooth big ring. Till then I need to figure out how to finish my Kona build. Missing still is a fork, tune hubs, some nice sun ringle rims, and bunch of spokes.
    OT Well, be careful. That Tune CS has a reputation for flexiness as I have read. On a side note; my good riding bro has a Kent Erikson custom 29er. I met Kent Erikson at the Chequamegon race in Wisconson last fall. He's a good guy. I'd look nowhere else for a custon Ti bike if I wanted Ti. Finish that Hei Hei Kona build already!!
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  24. #24
    Now broadcasting from CO
    Reputation: PAmtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,223
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRT BOY
    They are
    Not according to FSA they're not... when I asked in October they said late January, when I asked about two weeks ago they said beginning of April... unless you know of some secret way of obtaining them...
    Brought to you by rocks.

  25. #25
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,006
    Quote Originally Posted by PAmtbiker
    Not according to FSA they're not... when I asked in October they said late January, when I asked about two weeks ago they said beginning of April... unless you know of some secret way of obtaining them...
    I asked last week and they said they are. Maybe they made a mistake.

    As of 10 min ago from FSA:

    We received a small quantity and had a lot of distributor back orders accumulated.
    There may be some available.
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    125
    nino, Is the chainline for the 2x9 better than the 3x9? Can you run a standard road FD with it?

  27. #27
    Now broadcasting from CO
    Reputation: PAmtbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,223
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRT BOY
    I asked last week and they said they are. Maybe they made a mistake.

    As of 10 min ago from FSA:

    We received a small quantity and had a lot of distributor back orders accumulated.
    There may be some available.
    Oh... maybe I'll ask my LBS about it... I haven't been able to find it online (constant Froogle searches) anywhere though...
    Brought to you by rocks.

  28. #28
    I wanna go fast!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    ah i see.

    BUT this won't give you a better chainline. the chainrings would be too far inward!
    and it would get you an ugly looking crankset as well.
    It actually will give you a better chainline. You can run in your big ring the majority of the time and go big/big with no horrible cross chaining because it's really like going middle/big. You only have to drop down to the "little" ring to get to the bigger cogs in the back, so you don't cross chain there either. I am running a setup similar to this and I really like it. As far as looks go...well, it doesn't look too bad, I've actually received a few compliments on it. To each his own

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
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.