# RaceFace Next SL 2x10 crank?



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

Re-posting it into the weight weenies forums... perhaps there are more crazy people like me here.

Hi guys,

Anyone here running a Raceface Next SL 2x10 crank? Or any of the newer Next SL cranks?

I'm curious to hear if there have been any issues with the latest batches/designs. If the claimed weight is accurate to the real weight of the cranks.










Thanks.


----------



## pplucena (Dec 25, 2010)

Very stiff, good finish, no problems and the weight was truth. But mine are the 3x9 ones. I wish a 2x10 in the future.


----------



## Veda (Dec 17, 2009)

670gr? My cheap Aerozine double is only 679gr without BB. Why get this?


----------



## PissedOffCil (Oct 18, 2007)

Veda said:


> 670gr? My cheap Aerozine double is only 679gr without BB. Why get this?


They are lighter than that with BB :

From the RF website "WEIGHT: complete with bb
595g (26-38T, 175mm)
610g (28-40T, 175mm)
625g (30-42T, 175mm)"


----------



## pplucena (Dec 25, 2010)

Stiffness, Perfect shifting, finish. I got a lighting crank set, less them 500 gr and I will change them for this race face in the future. No noise and Perfect shifting is the reason.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

Veda said:


> 670gr? My cheap Aerozine double is only 679gr without BB. Why get this?


Aerozine's are flexy, crap.


----------



## Veda (Dec 17, 2009)

COLINx86 said:


> Aerozine's are flexy, crap.


Have you measured them and see how much flexy they are compared to high end cranks? Or is it just your feeling while pedaling?


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

Veda said:


> Have you measured them and see how much flexy they are compared to high end cranks? Or is it just your feeling while pedaling?


Personally I don't own a set, but have a friend who does, and you can see them flex while riding (yes I rode them for myself but on his bike). I guess I should throw this out there before someone makes a remark about me being fat, etc. I only weigh 145lbs and can't hardly feel anything flex unless it's pretty severe.


----------



## Veda (Dec 17, 2009)

COLINx86 said:


> Personally I don't own a set, but have a friend who does, and you can see them flex while riding (yes I rode them for myself but on his bike).


Not sure why you'd call a product crappy when you don't have real life data to back it up other than visual cues while riding... I'd try timing 4 rides of the same track using both the aerozine and another crank of similar price that you deem stiffer (I bet heavier) but keeping the same BB. If you consistently went way faster with the heavier crank then the aerozine must be so flexy you lost so much torque to the rear wheel.

PS: Granted given the shaft of Aerozine cranks are shorter than other brands, I see incorrect installations 60% of the time. Most of the time they must be run with only 1-2 spacer rings.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

I could FEEL it flexing, and that's enough for me. If your content riding flexy cranks then good for you.


----------



## Veda (Dec 17, 2009)

COLINx86 said:


> I could FEEL it flexing, and that's enough for me. If your content riding flexy cranks then good for you.


We're interested in finding facts not placebo or biased opinion that could very well be due to incorrect part installation. You should elaborate on why you think a particular equipment is good or bad. Sorry if you're offended, but there're lots of BS expensive products out there in the market...


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

Veda said:


> We're interested in finding facts not placebo or biased opinion that could very well be due to incorrect part installation. You should elaborate on why you think a particular equipment is good or bad. Sorry if you're offended, but there're lots of BS expensive products out there in the market...


Flexing is not a placebo affect, and I'm not sure how I am biased. The cranks were flexy, that is all. If you put weight above stiffness, then buy them. If you are like most of the world then don't. I'm not going to waste my time riding a trail 4 times and changing the cranks after every lap. I can't elaborate any further than they were FLEXY.

I was never offended and I'm still not, but apparently you are.

Anyways, I'm not going to argue with you. If you want to spend your money on flexy cranks, because they are light, be my guest.


----------



## Cheers! (Jun 26, 2006)

Veda said:


> Not sure why you'd call a product crappy when you don't have real life data to back it up other than visual cues while riding... I'd try timing 4 rides of the same track using both the aerozine and another crank of similar price that you deem stiffer (I bet heavier) but keeping the same BB. If you consistently went way faster with the heavier crank then the aerozine must be so flexy you lost so much torque to the rear wheel.
> 
> PS: Granted given the shaft of Aerozine cranks are shorter than other brands, I see incorrect installations 60% of the time. Most of the time they must be run with only 1-2 spacer rings.


I ran the Atik Titanium 3x9 crankset several years back. Similar in design and execution to the Aerozine. Except with titanium spindle. I'm certain they come from the same far east factory as the Aerozine. They look similar.

Problems I had with it.

Instruction sheet was translated with poor english. No torque specfification on what to tighten the bottom bracket to. no torque specification for the pinch bolts or any bolts for that matter. The left side crank arm kept on coming loose. In the end I just torque everything up to the same tightness to what shimano recommends for their M970 crankset.

I had to reference a FSA crankset to figure out how many spacers to use.

Once I torqued everything up it still came loose. I relied on loctite 242 to hold it all together. The spider or rings were flexy. Not sure which contributed to the flex most. But the thing would flex so much that if you were in the middle ring and using the 32 tooth cog in the back it would through the chain into the granny gear for the crankset. No amount of front derailleur adjustment could correct it. Then if you were hammering in the 11 tooth small cog and middle ring the crank would flex enough for the chain to catch the big ring... WTF????

This was on a specialized Sworks M4 hardtail stumpjumper. I ditched that crank after 3 months of fruststration.

In the end... stick with proven.


----------



## Veda (Dec 17, 2009)

Cheers! said:


> In the end... stick with proven.


Here's the thing though, if everybody's playing safe and nobody's willing to experiment then the weight weenie world is hella boring... I believe there has to be cheap alternatives out there that are 80-90% just as good as the best stuff out there performance-wise, that is real world measured data. Too many BS pretty parts that don't do much while riding...


----------



## Tchak-Tchak (May 23, 2005)

I just wanted to let you know about the very bad experience I've had with my broken race face Next SL crankset. It broke after less than 2 months.

























The crankset broke at the eyelets were the chainring are bolted.
I'm a 69kg rider, and the crankset was installed on my xc hardtail bike.
Their customer service is terrible. They denied me any warranty, and they didn't want to know anything. Even worse, they only answered my emails when i started to threaten them to put pictures of my broken crankset all over the internet.
Anyway, they told me that there was no warranty for that. That's more or less their polite version of "f*** off !".
This company is a joke, and their customer service is the worst ever.
I will never buy race face products again, that is for sure.


----------



## Guest (May 28, 2013)

^^ any details as to how the ring tab broke??


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2013)

Tchak-Tchak said:


> I just wanted to let you know about the very bad experience I've had with my broken race face Next SL cra
> The crankset broke at the eyelets were the chainring are bolted.
> I'm a 69kg rider, and the crankset was installed on my xc hardtail bike.
> Their customer service is terrible. They denied me any warranty, and they didn't want to know anything. Even worse, they only answered my emails when i started to threaten them to put pictures of my broken crankset all over the internet.
> ...


Again I enquire (1 post since 2005 Tchak-Tchak) HOW did this failure take place?? I would offer up some possible scenerios but would much rather hear/read it from you.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

That tab failure happened in the first generation of carbon Next 3 ring cranks, I had a set of those replaced on warranty way back when. The replacements have been solid.

Were those failed cranks bought new from an authorized dealer?


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

Based on the graphics, his cranks are 2011+, not first generation.


----------



## ginsu2k (Jul 28, 2006)

That's the way carbon fails. I'm surprised WWs are still so adamant about having carbon everything. Personally, I like the weight of carbon, but I use it more for comfort in strategic areas such as handlebars, seatpost, seat rails as it doesn't resonate the way metals do. Also, those specific items are usually reasonably priced and they tend last awhile if you don't wreck much.

Honestly, carbon performs well only when it is loaded exactly the way it was designed. For seatposts and handlebars it is difficult to load them in unexpected ways without crashing, but when you have a carbon in a very dynamic area such as cranks or wheels you should be more wary, as it simply will not last. Quite frankly, that RaceFace crank has inherent design flaws because carbon is strong in tension but very weak in compression, obviously tight bolts will cause the carbon to fatigue and will lead to premature failure. It is obviously a poor design and should have had a aluminum spider to begin with. Of course, we are bred to think that if you pay more you get a better product, and if you use space age materials you automatically get space age performance!


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

I've broken three different Race Face ALUMINUM cranks. They were all replaced under warranty. Things break no matter what they're made of.


----------



## dragonq (Nov 5, 2006)

quote from anonymous: strong, light, cheap - pick two


----------



## clarkalewis (Mar 2, 2004)

my wife has a year of hard riding on her 2012 next SL 2x10 crankset with no issues. easy install, stiff, good shifting, bb still smooth.


----------



## turbogrover (Dec 4, 2005)

ginsu2k said:


> That's the way carbon fails. I'm surprised WWs are still so adamant about having carbon everything.


Aluminum cranks fail that way too. What's your point? Carbon cranks have been around for years with total reliability. You see a pic of one broken tab, and say "that's the way carbon fails", without even knowing the circumstances of the failure. I've seen dozens of aluminum crank failures....it doesn't mean all aluminum cranks are crap either, but I'd trust the Next SL cranks more than I would the Aerozine cranks....


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

turbogrover said:


> Aluminum cranks fail that way too. What's your point? Carbon cranks have been around for years with total reliability. You see a pic of one broken tab, and say "that's the way carbon fails", without even knowing the circumstances of the failure. I've seen dozens of aluminum crank failures....it doesn't mean all aluminum cranks are crap either, but I'd trust the Next SL cranks more than I would the Aerozine cranks....


+1

I've had Next SL cranks on three different bikes and I haven't had any problems with any of them.

They're light, but they're as stiff and shift as well as XTR's.


----------



## ghettocruiser (Jun 21, 2008)

I also had the tabs fail on a 2010 and the warranty 2012 crank. (XCs, not SLs) Raceface warrantied the second one as well, this time with a 2X10, and they replaced it in less than a week. 

Without the outer chainring, the 2X10 has far thicker chainring tabs, probably three times as much material. It's been over a year now, and I dare say this solution may work, even for a carbon-chainring-tab skeptic such as myself.


----------



## ginsu2k (Jul 28, 2006)

Callin' bullshit on that. Never seen an aluminum crank fail on the mounting tabs.

Since I've built racecar chassis out of carbon and I'm an engineer, I will disregard your other comments.


----------



## turbogrover (Dec 4, 2005)

ginsu2k said:


> Callin' bullshit on that. Never seen an aluminum crank fail on the mounting tabs.
> 
> Since I've built racecar chassis out of carbon and I'm an engineer, I will disregard your other comments.


Call it what you want, its still the same. 
I'm also an M.E. with a lifetime of stress analysis experience in any type of material. You make assumptions without knowing the member that posted the pics, or what the true situation of the failure was from.

There are thousands of examples of aluminum crank failures. So many are from installation error as well. You can't engineer around ignorance when dealing with light weight racing parts. You have a huge group of amateur bike mechanics, installing and using exotic race equipment on their everyday bikes.

Call it what you want....


----------



## brentos (May 19, 2006)

I had a set for about 1000 miles of pretty hard aggressive riding. (Next XC 2x10)

They shifted as well as I could ask (as well as Sram's rings), they were true to claimed wieight, and they were durable). Didn't feel quite as stiff as the XX1 I replaced them with, but it didn't harm the ride quality in any way, if anything it dampened out some vibrations. Works best with a Sram 2x10 Front Derailleur (same chainline).






















View attachment 806118


----------

