# Inexpensive Lightweight Crank Options



## Crackhead_Willy (Sep 7, 2009)

I am looking for an inexpensive lightweight crankset for my XC 29er (Niner Air9). The bike will be used mainly for trail riding and XC racing. It looks like the best option that I have found is the SLX triple crankset for ~$130. It is almost as light as the XT crankset (rings are heavier), but cheaper and some say it is stronger. I may convert it to a double (2x9) in the future and put on some lighter chainrings to lose shed weight. Hopefully I can get it down to under 800 grams with only two chainrings. Any other ideas or recommendations?


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

Check this link Aerozine .
Salu2
Juan


----------



## 92gli (Sep 28, 2006)

slightly used xt on ebay


----------



## Soya (Jun 22, 2007)

My Aerozine cranks were a bit over your budget at $230, but they are 700gr for the dual chainring model.


----------



## alexrex20 (Dec 20, 2005)

used XTR970 on ebay = $150 if you shop around


----------



## xcatax (Mar 26, 2009)

Soya said:


> My Aerozine cranks were a bit over your budget at $230, but they are 700gr for the dual chainring model.


Yeah mines going with 32t and used to be 3 chainrings


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

Inexpensive and light and good is a nearly impossible solution, maybe a used weight weenie crankset is better suited to your needs?


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

My version of inexpensive and light as used on my Winterbike:

Crankarms: Race-Face Next LP bought used on Ebay (408g)
BB: KCNC or Token scandium BB off Ebay (68/108, ca. 150g with bolts)
Chainrings: 27/40 (49g)
Chainringbolts: aluminium (ca. 10g)

----> 628g complete for about 250$

ups-sorry-i just read your budget again and 130$ is just too little for anything "light" in my eyes.

But then again, you could as well get a cheaper steel BB and cheaper rings instead and get away with let's say 150$ and roughly 750g weight.
"old" cranksets with seperate BBs let you tune the chainline if you ever plan to convert to double chainrings. Especially those integrated Shimano cranks suffer from poor chainlines and restrict you to have a perfect 2x9 setup later on. I suggest "old" cranksets with seperate BBs as they allow you to change chainline which is mandatory for best performance when going for a double setup.


----------



## TheRedMantra (Jan 12, 2004)

Light square taper bbs are not too $$$ and a set of raceface turbine lp cranks with chainrings shouldn't be too hard to find for cheap. Lots of colors too.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Raceface-turbin...Cycling_Parts_Accessories&hash=item35aabb730b


----------



## loggerhead (Mar 8, 2009)

i use square ti. bottom bracket with old school caramba cranks. i would look for older lighter cranks if you want cheap. cook, caramba, kooka, topline, hershey, etc.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

I'm using square raceface next LPs on my 25.1 pound full suspension 650B bike. Sugino Impel 500/700 cranks were pretty light in square taper and the 58/94 bolt pattern lends itself to very light triple or double ring setups. Look for "Coda Crank" or "sugino crank" on ebay and you'll find lots of them.


----------



## B R H (Jan 13, 2004)

nino said:


> My version of inexpensive and light as used on my Winterbike:
> 
> Crankarms: Race-Face Next LP bought used on Ebay (408g)
> BB: KCNC or Token scandium BB off Ebay (68/108, ca. 150g with bolts)
> ...


Beware these cranks will probably crack. ISIS BBs are junk but the seperate axle is better than the integrated stuff so popular lately. Are there any cranksets out there that use the "x-type" BB bearings but also have the axle seperate from the crank arms?


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Lots of reasonable square taper cranks, but hard to get anything usable as a double with <29T ring. There's not so many nice cranks out there, but lots of strong, cheap ones. I've been looking...

I'm not so keen on ISIS as most BBs seem to have issues, except maybe the SKF ones which are hard to get, expensive and heavy too. Even on road bikes, lots of headaches. (FWIW, I used to work in a shop so I'm not totally talking out of turn here.) Also, not so many chainline options as with square taper.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

satanas said:


> Lots of reasonable square taper cranks, but hard to get anything usable as a double with <29T ring. There's not so many nice cranks out there, but lots of strong, cheap ones. I've been looking...
> 
> I'm not so keen on ISIS as most BBs seem to have issues, except maybe the SKF ones which are hard to get, expensive and heavy too. Even on road bikes, lots of headaches. (FWIW, I used to work in a shop so I'm not totally talking out of turn here.) Also, not so many chainline options as with square taper.


To use a "old" crankset as double you need to run the rings on the inner 2 positions!
So where you usually had the 22t you now will have the 26/27 etc...and where you had the 32t you now will have the 40/42 "big" ring...leaving the outer position completely empty.

By adjusting BB axle lenght you have the option to get the best possible chainline while with all those new integrated cranksets you don't have the possibility change chainline.

Me too i'd say get square BBs in first place as they are really troublefree and come in a vast variety of lenghts as well. Lightweight square Ti BBs can be had from about 135g (103mm axle lenght)...


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

nino said:


> To use a "old" crankset as double you need to run the rings on the inner 2 positions!


The problem with that is that you're effectively "wasting space" and making the Q-factor bigger than it needs to be. I know some people don't notice or care about this but unfortunately I do. And to get the chainline right, the cranks ideally needs to come out slightly to. Maybe the new XTR cranks might not have an excessive Q, but knowing Shimano I doubt that will be the case.

FWIW, I'm using Ritchey Logic compact cranks on a couple of bikes, one with a 107mm BB and 42x31x20, the other with a 103mm BB, 42x29 and road derailleurs. I'd really like to change the outer ring to 40T on the double but haven't been able to find anything in 94PCD other than one I got from CRC in the UK; for some weird reason neither 8 nor 9 speed chains will run on it smoothly <sigh>.

I guess since I can't get a smaller inner ring and keep the low Q and 172.5mm arms my best option may be to switch to an 11- or 12-36 cassette.

So far I've never broken a square taper BB and can only recall replacing one, where a Campag alu cup pitted - after only 16 years! :nono: And there are lots of axle lengths, plus various ways of adjusting chainline.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Why? You are aware the new XX cranks for example run the "big" ring inside the spider where the middle is on a triple, and the "small" ring is in the inner position. As to the limit on a ring of 29T for a double, that's true on a 94mm BCD, but its more than that with a 104mm or 110mm and lots convert their newer XTR and whatnot 4-bolt cranks to a double setup. With 11-36 cassettes, a 29T low ring is perfectly fine for most people. Hell, I've done bikes with a 29T single ring and an 11-32T cassette and been quite happy with it.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

It's not that simple. If you look at XX_Frame_Fit_Specifications.pdf you will see that the rings are in fact positioned such that the outer is where the outer of a triple would be (assuming a 47mm chainline), and that the inner is in fact somewhat further inboard than the middle ring would usually be, presumably so that more of the sprockets are usable with the inner ring.

Yes, they are both on the inside of the spider but that is the only way it can realistically be done if there are two different PCDs; FWIW, Specialised and Rotor both make spiders this way for some of their cranks for the same reason.

Yes, it is certainly possible to just omit the outer ring and have things work okay, and also to play with the chainline a bit if desired. However, I want to keep the Q-factor as small as possible and this means keeping the outer ring close to the crankarm. Past experience and injuries have demonstrated to my satisfaction that this is worth doing.

I agree that most people will be fine with 29x36 or even 29x32 for racing and/or shorter rides, but my uses are trail riding and occasional marathon events. There are also quite a few long steep climbs where I ride and I like to sit and spin, not stand and grind. I like close ratios too, hence my desire to avoid 11-36 if I can; the Shimano 11-32 and 11-34 cassettes are much more to my liking with smaller gaps where I spend most of my time.

Am I trying to have my cake and eat it too? Maybe...


----------



## markw1970 (Oct 8, 2007)

satanas said:


> I'd really like to change the outer ring to 40T on the double but haven't been able to find anything in 94PCD other than one I got from CRC in the UK; for some weird reason neither 8 nor 9 speed chains will run on it smoothly <sigh>.


Hi, if it helps try Spa Cycles in the UK. Nice guys to deal with and loads of different chainrings available. I recently bought some nice Stronglight chainrings.

Here's a link to the 94PCD 40T Stronglight rings:

http://www.spacycles.co.uk/products...Components_-_Gears_-_Chainrings_-_Stronglight

Hope it helps


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Except nobody ever actually had a 47mm chainline. The closest was a 47.5 and that's measured where the middle ring is on a triple crank.


----------



## satanas (Feb 12, 2005)

Thanks Mark, I'll give them a try. :thumbsup:


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

e.thirteen triple

http://perigeum.com/bythehive/?page_id=870


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

satanas said:


> Am I trying to have my cake and eat it too? Maybe...


We're in the same boat. But besides looking just at some numbers on .pdf files you should actually try out such a "old" set converted to double and you will be amazed at the result.

I run my RF cranks with a short road BB yet get a perfect fit on my frame. you will have a short q-factor AND a perfect chainline to be able to use all gears on the cassette with each ring.It is definitely noticeable that the cranks spin more freely from having less drag of crossed chains.

Then again me too i don't like the bigger gaps of 34 and 36 cassettes so i'm still using 11-32 cassettes paired to somewhat smaller rings up front. I personally use 40/27 on one bike and 40/26 on the other with that 26 really allowing me also to do steeper and longer climbs. But for my everday riding a 27 is all i need up front. The smaller rings paired to a closer spaced cassette give you a setup with smaller steps from one gear to the next which i always liked. That was the reason i used to run a 12-27 DA cassette for years...but back then was still still using a triple crankset. Now with the double and the smaller chainrings i get a similar setup but with MUCH less front shifts.


----------



## G (Feb 22, 2010)

What about a carbon crankset, like this:
http://cgi.ebay.com/SRAM-TRUVATIV-2010-XX-CARBON-MTB-CRANKSET-26-39-175mm-/360241100052

http://cgi.ebay.com/FSA-Team-Issue-...Cycling_Parts_Accessories&hash=item4cf0904720

Also, Race Face ISIS = not good?


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

Screw ISIS!

I too thought... oh how bad could it be... bad. I'm killing the bearings every 3 months of racing. Good thing the American Classic ISIS BB is rebuildable. Bearings are 5 bucks each from Enduro.


----------



## facelessfools (Aug 30, 2008)

Cheers! said:


> Screw ISIS!
> 
> I too thought... oh how bad could it be... bad. I'm killing the bearings every 3 months of racing. Good thing the American Classic ISIS BB is rebuildable. Bearings are 5 bucks each from Enduro.


have you tried the crankbrothers?
mine has had a ton of use, 7 months and i think 14 races..


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

No. Because then it gets heavy. If I was going to do that I would ditch the Middleburn DUO setup and go with something else that was light and reliable... I.e. 2011 XTR crankset. 

If you want durability SKF is the way to go. 

ISIS is not the way to go.


----------



## facelessfools (Aug 30, 2008)

shimano xtr, around 780g 
middleburn rs7 duo + crankbrothers cobalt ti + ti bolts = 743g


----------



## biglines (Apr 6, 2009)

To the original poster,
I am running some SLX cranks right now with Specialties TA chinook rings 26/38 and the stock chainring bolts. It weighs in at 710 grams plus another 100 grams for the shimano BB. Best value i have found so far, IMO. Plus the SLX cranks are 100% stiffer than the xt's.


----------



## loggerhead (Mar 8, 2009)

Polishdog said:


> What about a carbon crankset, like this:
> http://cgi.ebay.com/SRAM-TRUVATIV-2010-XX-CARBON-MTB-CRANKSET-26-39-175mm-/360241100052
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.com/FSA-Team-Issue-...Cycling_Parts_Accessories&hash=item4cf0904720
> ...


Read the title again:nonod:


----------



## Broseph (Nov 9, 2006)

facelessfools said:


> shimano xtr, around 780g
> middleburn rs7 duo + crankbrothers cobalt ti + ti bolts = 743g


I've never had a problem with any other isis bb except for my Am Classic. Plus, price wise, you really can't put 2011 XTR and Middleburn Duo in the same category. New XTR is gonna be ridiculously expensive.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Here, $54 including the shipping BIN price.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Cannondale-Coda...Cycling_Parts_Accessories&hash=item4cf054c916

If you want light and triple with a splined reliable BB, search for M950 and M952 XTR stuff on ebay. A crankset and BB shouldn't run more than $100 in good condition. The M952 crankset with self-extracting crank bolts is about 685g with 24-34-46 9speed rings and an M950 BB is about 185g and completely rebuildable/serviceble. It uses caged stainless needle and ball bearings and doesn't need more than a regreasing every year or so.


----------



## tpilk (Jan 4, 2008)

Maybe this would work...You might be able to use some bmx-centric cranksets and run double chainrings. No provision for triple if you go that route, though.

I have AC Mini LEs on my 1x9 commuter bike and they're great.

They're forged, weigh around 500 grams, come in a bunch of colors, lengths from 135mm - 175mm and either square taper or ISIS configurations. 110 BCD, so rings are easy to find. I got mine here for about $60 on closeout. "ACE86" coupon code should save you an additional $5 from that site, if anybody's interested.










For the money, these are unbeatable in certain applications.


----------



## loggerhead (Mar 8, 2009)

tpilk said:


> Maybe this would work...You might be able to use some bmx-centric cranksets and run double chainrings. No provision for triple if you go that route, though.
> 
> I have AC Mini LEs on my 1x9 commuter bike and they're great.
> 
> ...


I don't know how much AC has changed over the years but after cracking two sets of their cranks back in sometime mid 90's and having their rear hub freeze up with no fix unless I bought their special tool for disassemble, I vowed never to buy this crap again. Hopefully, their products have become more reliable. $60 for cranks? Maybe they haven't.:nono:


----------



## vpd7 (Apr 20, 2007)

I used an LX crankset, removed the 44, and 32 chainrings, and put a FSA 36 in place of the middle ring. It's cheap, common and served my needs. I never had a problem, and I only removed it when I picked up a used FRM 2x9.


----------

