# Race Face Next SL



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Check these out:










Carbon arms but now with a Ti axel to drop more weight. Would be nice if it weren't for the massive NEXT logo !


----------



## Ausable (Jan 7, 2006)

Really ugly...they have been inspired by the equally massive NOIR logo on the truvativ cranks
But what about price and availability?


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

No idea about price etc - there at Interbike. Some wool cloth would lift the lacquer and the decals off though......


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Tiffster said:


> No idea about price etc - there at Interbike. Some wool cloth would lift the lacquer and the decals off though......


to make these new RFs appealing you would need to get rid of all the decals (as you already mentioned with emery cloth and some new laquer) and you would also have to invest in some FRM rings as RF so far has a reputation for the heaviest rings in the business. i am sure these cranks with FRM rings would be a lot lighter still. but then we would probably look at quite an investement too...


----------



## STS (Jun 24, 2004)

bur RF rings are heavy, so with light rings the RF would be under 650g...
and some friends told me the Atik/Aerozine are really flexy

the problem is that if it is dificult to get the actual Next carbon cranks, so imagine with Next SL...


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

STS said:


> bur RF rings are heavy, so with light rings the RF would be under 650g...
> and some friends told me the Atik/Aerozine are really flexy
> 
> the problem is that if it is dificult to get the actual Next carbon cranks, so imagine with Next SL...


your friends must be overweight...


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

I know the Next ones have been out for a while but i never see them for sale anywhere? I have seen a pair though - someone bought them so there available from someone.

I actually rode some Aerozine branded cranks at the weekend. It was hampered by them constantly coming loose but the rings didn't shift too well. Can't say i noticed flex but i was really focusing on it..


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*easy fix*



Tiffster said:


> I know the Next ones have been out for a while but i never see them for sale anywhere? I have seen a pair though - someone bought them so there available from someone.
> 
> I actually rode some Aerozine branded cranks at the weekend. It was hampered by them constantly coming loose but the rings didn't shift too well. Can't say i noticed flex but i was really focusing on it..


you have to use Loctite on the left arm fixing bolt.easy fix.
they rock with FRM rings.

those Next should be pretty light with FRM rings too. it would be interesting to get some weights for the RF rings...


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

The Race Face cranks have been "released" for a while but they haven't really been shipping, I've been pestering the guys at my LBS about these cranks for most of 2008 and they know the Race Face folks but there's been no product available.

Race Face Next SL cranks apparently have a Ti spindle to get to 689gms and are 729 with the steel spindle. Singletrack magazine had these shots from Interbike.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Very interresting indeed.... Bit of work to remove those decals and you'd have some wicked cranks. Lighter rings too and you'd be singing


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Subtle they are not. Big orange decals? What were they thinking there? That if you spend more money on the product you really want to be conspicuous about the product branding?

On the other hand, the new Deus cranks in red ano are looking sexy.  They might find their way onto my SXC Canuck edition.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Hmm those are nice. Good point about the NEXT SL's though. I'd rather have a wee logo than that tosh.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Or even a not so small but suitably integrated design logo that looks like it belongs on a high tech bike part. I know the rakishly offset and loud graphic style suits the WIRED magazine crowd, but it just looks like they hired visually impaired high school dropouts to stick the decals on.:skep: 

It's bad enough that the 31.8mm bars give more space for blatant graphics.... :skep:


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

If the logo was grey and not back filled but bright Orange?? I mean that just won't go with my Red/white/black colour combo bike!


----------



## EGF168 (Aug 13, 2007)

rockyuphill said:


> The Race Face cranks have been "released" for a while but they haven't really been shipping, I've been pestering the guys at my LBS about these cranks for most of 2008 and they know the Race Face folks but there's been no product available.


That's strange, they've been available in small quantities in the UK for a while, I know a few riders who got theirs a month or so back, one of them is an Mtbr member.:skep:

There's some more on the cranks here including a really nice SS set&#8230;

http://bikemag.com/gallery/interbike_08_hardware/


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Is that website working? All i get is a spinning thing in the middle of the screen??

The Next cranks are priced really good in the UK at £360 which for carbon cranks lighter than XTR is really good. Wonder how much the Next SL's will be IF there available.

Why bother with the Non Ti ones though.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

EGF168 said:


> That's strange, they've been available in small quantities in the UK for a while, I know a few riders who got theirs a month or so back, one of them is an Mtbr member.:skep:
> 
> There's some more on the cranks here including a really nice SS set&#8230;
> 
> http://bikemag.com/gallery/interbike_08_hardware/


It could be that the Canadian distributor isn't bothering to stock them yet, it's always odd having a component distributed by a bike parts wholesaler when the actual manufacturer is a 20 minute drive from my LBS.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Tiffster said:


> Is that website working? All i get is a spinning thing in the middle of the screen??
> 
> The Next cranks are priced really good in the UK at £360 which for carbon cranks lighter than XTR is really good. Wonder how much the Next SL's will be IF there available.
> 
> Why bother with the Non Ti ones though.


It takes a long while to load.

I wonder if the Ti spindle version will have a rider weight limit like the old Race Face Ti BB's had.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

nino said:


> still lighter though...


Yeah but don't the FRM rings stink.

Put those FRM rings on the Next SL's and weigh.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Surely you could drive up and ask them then?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

It's true, they are that close. 20 minutes out of rush hour.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Slobberdoggy said:


> Yeah but don't the FRM rings stink.
> 
> Put those FRM rings on the Next SL's and weigh.


no, not at all.
the whole Swisspower Team uses them as well...

i have a crosscountry racer here that finished 2nd in the swiss championships in the over 35 class. he raced the Atiks with these rings all season long and couldn't be happier.they replaced some XTRs!

the FRMs are light and shift very good.weights below...


----------



## schnapmaster (Feb 26, 2004)

*Weight of RF rings*

They actually weighed the rings from that crankset for me at the booth. I can't remember exactly but I think they were either 130g or 150g. I think the arms and bottom brackett came out to around 550g.
Sorry my recollection isn't clearer. A few days in Vegas will do that to you.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

about 155gms including a bit of dirt/grease on a set of RF Team rings. That's with the alloy granny.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*expensive...*



rockyuphill said:


> about 155gms including a bit of dirt/grease on a set of RF Team rings. That's with the alloy granny.


that's why i expected and that's why i said these RFs will become quite expensive if you have to buy some extra rings to get them light...


----------



## 2times (Jul 14, 2006)

Sitting here looking at the pics makes me think that the RF Cranks with with the FRM rings would'nt actually look too bad, big logo and all. The RF rings are so "busy" with RF printed everywhere and the shiny silver/black contrasting that the FRM rings would actually play the whole thing down a bit.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

They could be closer to 150gms now as it looks like they are removing more material on that silver bevel around the inside of the rings. The team rings I have here are average 3-4mm thick on that inner edge, with maybe 2mm to the shallowest shift ramp machining on the opposite side. The inner edge on the bevel in those new Team Rings looks more knife edge.


----------



## 743power (Sep 25, 2007)

is there a source for frm rings in the us or a resonable priced source in europe? starbike wants $60 for shipping alone on one chainring. Chainreaction will ship me a complete crankset for $20.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*too heavy!!!*



rockyuphill said:


> They could be closer to 150gms now as it looks like they are removing more material on that silver bevel around the inside of the rings. The team rings I have here are average 3-4mm thick on that inner edge, with maybe 2mm to the shallowest shift ramp machining on the opposite side. The inner edge on the bevel in those new Team Rings looks more knife edge.


150g is just heavy !

pictured below a set of standard rings of the Atik cranks (136g) and a set i shaved (114g)

and finally a set of Token/Shuriken rings i shaved to 110g

that's always without touching any shifting ramps! i never had any issues with such rings.


----------



## reformed roadie (Mar 30, 2008)

*RF rings*

I don't own them, but RF rings have a pretty good rep for shifting well, due to pins/ramps, maybe stiffness is a factor too.

My new shimano rings (XT)shift noticeably better than the older version they replaced. 
I don't see the wisdom in sacraficing better front shifting for no more than maybe 40 grams.

If you're racing and botch a front shift at a critical moment, you're going to lose more time than 40 grams is saving you. 
It's like tires. A light or narrow tire is worthless if you are losing traction and stalling on every steep/technical climb.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*never missed a shift...*



reformed roadie said:


> I don't own them, but RF rings have a pretty good rep for shifting well, due to pins/ramps, maybe stiffness is a factor too.
> 
> My new shimano rings (XT)shift noticeably better than the older version they replaced.
> I don't see the wisdom in sacraficing better front shifting for no more than maybe 40 grams.
> ...


my rings (29/42)....never missed a shift...they are lighter than a single 44t

triple? my 20/32/42 weigh 89g. same here, never had any issues.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

I agree on that. Sometimes weight isn't everything - although i probably would still change the chainrings as the stock ones look bad, and i would want a titanium middle ring.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Good pic:


----------



## compositepro (Jun 21, 2007)

tiffster i have a pair of next sl cranks you can get a set at winstanleys they had a pair in last time i checked

nino the swiss power team could win on a base model without the lightweight stuff.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

It's the Next cranks they have not the Next SL's.

Im going to wait and see what happens. FSA are going to use a Ti axel on the K-force light cranks too last time i heard.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Tiffster said:


> Good pic:


Looks like the orange NEXT SL is clear coated onto the arms.


----------



## compositepro (Jun 21, 2007)

not sure if im missing something but whats the difference in the next and next sl the ones i got in front of me are called next sl


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Ti versus steel spindle


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

compositepro - Got any pics of your ones??? Do they say SL on them?


Im not sure about the decals - they could be removed anyway.


----------



## compositepro (Jun 21, 2007)

the box they both came in is listed as next sl the catalogue lists them as next sl

no Ti spindle though

Maybe its a free upgrade this year my spindles are cromo


----------



## kdiddy (Jul 14, 2005)

Tiffster said:


> Carbon arms but now with a Ti axel to drop more weight. Would be nice if it weren't for the massive NEXT logo !


So get some crankskins on them - http://www.crankskins.com/
It won't make them any lighter but it would protect the carbon face from wear and the associated stress risers. Plus you could get them to match your color scheme.


----------



## rensho (Mar 8, 2004)

I wonder if we can ever discuss a product without Nino posting giant pictures of the competitive products that he is pushing... Getting real tired of it. Really really tired.

Nice cranks, yeah the giant orange stickers are a little much. Hopefully, just for the tradeshow, rather than production.


----------



## eurorider (Feb 15, 2004)

It's hard to take any of these companies/cranksets seriously with no 180 mm option...

I guess I can stick with my ISIS Turbines or get XTR?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

from Bikeradar.com

_Buyers will have to wait a while longer for the upcoming Next SL, with release projected for the end of 2009. Once that day comes, though, Race Face will treat us with a complete crankset weighing just 695g that, again, shares the current Next's hollow carbon arms but now mates them with a titanium spindle and lighter alloy hardware. _


----------



## doktoree (Dec 28, 2004)

*some details*

some details of RF Next Sl


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*nice...*



doktoree said:


> some details of RF Next Sl


thanks for the update and details!
Doing the math i see the bare Next SL arms including axle are the same weight than the cranks i posted initially.

Doing the math again using the Next with lighter XTR BB (ca. 87g) and FRM rings (107g) and aluminium chainringbolts (13g) we would look at about 665g for the complete set.

so you spend a fortune in those cranks, invest in a lighter BB and rings only to get similar weight.hmm.

But i have to agree these are really sweet looking. the ARMS, not the rings and BB !


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Im looking forward to the SL titanium version coming out.

Those above weights - for me on a 2x9 setup with a Ceramic BB would be 674g complete with stock chainrings. 

Very interresting indeed!


----------



## doktoree (Dec 28, 2004)

*2x9*

my 2x9 setup: FRM Pro 42T (tuned to 47,7g) + TA Chinook 28T (tuned to 28,2g) with stock RF bb (113,9g with 3 spacers): 661,2g

replacing RF heavy bb to ceramic Token or standard XTR 970 will save ca. 25 grams
finally 2x9 setup would be 635g


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

doktoree said:


> my 2x9 setup: FRM Pro 42T (tuned to 47,7g) + TA Chinook 28T (tuned to 28,2g) with stock RF bb (113,9g with 3 spacers): 661,2g


Dang, you could have saved yourself a helluva a lot of money and just gone with the Middleburn Duo RS8 for 522g before choosing a BB.

BB


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

i dont think an XTR BB is 25g lighter. There 90-94g 

Still a nice crank though. The only thing that worries me is those chainring bolts touching the spider - it could damage them.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Tiffster said:


> i dont think an XTR BB is 25g lighter. There 90-94g
> 
> Still a nice crank though. The only thing that worries me is those chainring bolts touching the spider - it could damage them.


On my scale the XTR BB with 1x 2.5mm spacer was 89gms and the RF BB with 1x 2.5mm spacer was 113gms. I just assembled mine with the XTR BB and it worked like a charm.

I also switched the granny ring bolts from steel to FSA Torx alloy, that saved 11gms.


----------



## PimpinD (May 29, 2008)

http://tripxamerica.com/2008/12/07/shimano-xtr-bottom-bracket/

XTR BB 96g with 3 spacers

We have a RF NEXT with XTR bb and it weighted in at 703grams


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

The Ti BB is actually the spindle on the cranks, not the BB bearing set so the RF BB bearings will likely be the same weight unless they also go to ceramic bearings.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Remember when Shimano was the only company that included rings on their cranks? You could buy RaceFace arms and use whatever rings you wanted. I would have loved it if my K-Force Lights came with no rings so I could use FRMs in 22-32-42 without paying double.


----------



## PimpinD (May 29, 2008)

bummer... maybe you can sell the chain rings to someone on ebay?


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Yup, the 44T that came with it is going on Ebay.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Did you change to the 42? Also, have you considered having Mattias make you some custom Ti rings? He's been posting about this for a while now. There's a pretty long thread about his stuff here:

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=398494

Does anyone know for sure where the almost 40g. weight reduction on the 2009 FSA K-Force Light 2X9 cranks has come from versus the 2008? I see that they are selling road cranks in the same series with Ti spindles now, and wondered if they've done the same thing for the 2X9 MTB cranks. It's not listed anywhere in the specs.

I don't know if I should pick up a set of these, or wait for the RF Next SL cranks with the Ti spindle. I suspect they'll weigh about the same (just the cranks).


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Thanks for the tip on those Ti rings cuz the stock 22T is ready to be replaced. I did switch to 42 cuz I find 44/11 is useless except on the road. 42 allows me to use the big ring a lot more in the dirt.
Any other Ti 22T rings I should consider?


----------



## xcbiker88 (Apr 12, 2008)

Someone knows the q-factor of this crankset?


----------



## mcrent100 (Jan 25, 2007)

The FSA will shift better. I have the 3x9 2008 K Force light and they shift great compared to my old Race face Deus...Are you ditching the XTR 2x9 on your Yeti? I think that's what I remember you having on there...


QUOTE: Does anyone know for sure where the almost 40g. weight reduction on the 2009 FSA K-Force Light 2X9 cranks has come from versus the 2008? I see that they are selling road cranks in the same series with Ti spindles now, and wondered if they've done the same thing for the 2X9 MTB cranks. It's not listed anywhere in the specs.

I don't know if I should pick up a set of these, or wait for the RF Next SL cranks with the Ti spindle. I suspect they'll weigh about the same (just the cranks).


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Same thing here for me....

2x9 FSA Cranks with the Ti spindle or the Next SL with Ti spindle.

The thing is the FSA uses a customs BCD middle ring so replacements are FSA only or get some custom made with is a pain. Then again Race Face bearings are rubbish.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

RF Next 2x9:










RF Next SL 3x9:










Interresting - the Next SL 2x9 should be really light for the price


----------



## PimpinD (May 29, 2008)

how much is the 3x9 next sl crank going for? Ive been told to could get the regular Race Face next with bb for about $540 shipped...


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

No idea - there not out yet.


----------



## xcbiker88 (Apr 12, 2008)

Can't see the picture of the 2x9


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

I can


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

Tiffster said:


> I can


I can't see the picture of the 2x9 either


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Saved it and uploaded it so should be viewable now.


----------



## STS (Jun 24, 2004)

use them only for XC, I have a friend that broke te next crankset in the second ride
ok, he makes enduro, but...

if you whant a picture:


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Ouch - he/she has ripped all the chainring tabs off.... Must have been some impact


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

That's the kind of crap that happens when components are used for the wrong application..

My Next (CrMo spindled) should be in tomorrow..I'll be using some ExtraLite rings and an XTR bb..
I will post weights and pics









.


----------



## STS (Jun 24, 2004)

well, that friend says he didn't hit anything (it was the second ride..)
but maybe it was caused because loosen bolts
anyway, any alu cranck would have survived that


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

STS said:


> well, that friend says he didn't hit anything (it was the second ride..)
> but maybe it was caused because loosen bolts
> anyway, any alu cranck would have survived that


That sucks, hopefully I will fair much better..








RF NEXT (CroMo spindle)..
Claimed weight 730g..









With XTR M970 bb..
ExtraLite OctaRamp rings..
SRP Aluminum Fasners (inner ring)..







​
Now I'll have to install and test ride this weekend


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Jake Pay said:


> With XTR M970 bb..
> ExtraLite OctaRamp rings..
> SRP Aluminum Fasners (inner ring)..
> 
> ...


Any chance you'd do 1 more weight before you install? I'd like to know the weight of the cranks alone, with the bolts/hardware that attaches the left crank arm to the right. No BB, no chainrings, no chainring bolts. Just the 2 crank arms and the bolt for the left arm.

Thanks,

Jacques


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

BlownCivic said:


> Any chance you'd do 1 more weight before you install? I'd like to know the weight of the cranks alone, with the bolts/hardware that attaches the left crank arm to the right. No BB, no chainrings, no chainring bolts. Just the 2 crank arms and the bolt for the left arm.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jacques


Will do







Give me a few minutes..
~Jake


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

The Race Face rings on the Next cranks weigh in at 150gms. That's not including chain ring bolts. They ship with steel granny gear bolts so switching to alloy granny bolts gets you an 11gms saving right off the top. The other bolts are aluminium.


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

Jacques, here ya go..


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

The stock RF NEXT c-rings / fasners / bb​


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

STS said:


> use them only for XC, I have a friend that broke te next crankset in the second ride
> ok, he makes enduro, but...
> 
> if you whant a picture:


I am puzzled why people keep going for carbon bling on MTB. It is not much lighter, if at all, when made durable enough, and it is rarely as durable. Handlebars are pretty much the only thing worth it...


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Damn those are light... i wonder if the Next SL with 2x9 rings alloy bolts would be sub 600g if it is i won't be getting some Clavicula's


----------



## Batas (Jan 16, 2004)

Thank's!!! I was also very curious since I have the Xtr @ 534g for the both arms and attach bolt.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Batas said:


> Thank's!!! I was also very curious since I have the Xtr @ 534g for the both arms and attach bolt.


Ditto. I only need the arms though. I have the funky integrated BB on my Yeti ASR-C (not BB30), and am currently using the M970 XTRs. This would be a good place to shave 80-120 (Next SL with Ti spindle) grams.

Thanks a million for the effort Jake.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Thanks for the pics Jake.

Anyone know when the Ti version is due -might of been said but i appear to have missed it...


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

Tiffster said:


> Thanks for the pics Jake.
> 
> Anyone know when the Ti version is due -might of been said but i appear to have missed it...


No problemo









Rocky posted this back in Oct. 08........



rockyuphill said:


> from Bikeradar.com
> 
> _Buyers will have to wait a while longer for the upcoming Next SL, with release projected for the end of 2009. Once that day comes, though, Race Face will treat us with a complete crankset weighing just 695g that, again, shares the current Next's hollow carbon arms but now mates them with a titanium spindle and lighter alloy hardware. _


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Dang - could do with it now !


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Curmy said:


> I am puzzled why people keep going for carbon bling on MTB. It is not much lighter, if at all, when made durable enough, and it is rarely as durable. Handlebars are pretty much the only thing worth it...


Ha ha! 100g lighter than XTR isn't "much lighter if at all"? Also funny that you like carbon handlebars cuz a couple years ago people were saying the same thing about those that you are saying about cranks. I'm puzzled why some people are scared of carbon but think aluminum is strong.


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

Tiffster said:


> Dang - could do with it now !


The end of 09 was just to long await for me, that's why I went for the CroMo version..


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

I've emailed RF with a couple of questions - ill let people know the response.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

I emailed RF

Good news - the cranks are to be availble this summer !

Pricing is around $900 though


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Just to bring this back up... 

Am i correct in saying this as per Jakes pics:

RF rings 145g
RF bolts 17.5g
RF BB 113 g


So as the rings/bb/bolts are the same as this new SL version...

RF SL 680 grams complete

Minus above = 405 grams for just the arms ?

So + 8 grams for alloy bolts, 60 grams for a 42 T extralite outer and 35 gram for a 30t and an XTR BB at 90 grams = 598 grams.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

There's proof of existence....









Check out the CNC work on the chainrings...


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

I wonder if they saw the comments about the logo etc ?  

Much better if you ask me - i just noticed something about the earlier pics of them. If you look at the pics of them on the scales at the booth - they are lighter in each pic....


----------



## xcbiker88 (Apr 12, 2008)

Looks much better than before!


----------



## Megaclocker (Sep 28, 2005)

For 900$ they should include aluminium granny bolts...
The big ring look obese.

They look way better then before.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

http://www.bikemagic.com/news/article/mps/uan/6945

"Race Face continues its push for lighter (and pricier) cranks - not content with already beating XTR's weight with their current Next cranks, here's the first view of the titanium-axled, handmade Next SL, all 685g of 'em. Expected price is around $700 CAD. "

$700 CAD = $576.91 @ http://www.xe.com/pca/input.cgi?&Template=full&

685g with further weenie potential - that's not bad.

fantastic CNC work (done in Vancouver apparently) shame they look abit yumeya, hope that's TiN on granny there.

(edit to add currency conversion)


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

For the weight that is a good price - i might get a set and run lighter rings/bb - if its around 600 grams.


----------



## culturesponge (Aug 15, 2007)

Tiffster said:


> For the weight that is a good price - i might get a set and run lighter rings/bb - if its around 600 grams.


and that's probably the MSRP - so even better prices when they're available!

no granny + alloy bolts + tuned XTR M970 BB might drop a few grams

...anyone know if they might be compatible with Rotor XTR 970 Q Rings?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

The Race Face cranks/rings should be compatible with standard 104/64 BCD rings, they haven't done all sorts of proprietary things in the past, and they're likely thinking about selling chainrings as replacements too.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Dragging this back up... Anyone heard on a release date ?


----------



## pastajet (May 26, 2006)

Spoke with Race Face, supposed to go out to distributors and retailers next week


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

Cool ! Do you know what the RRP is now ?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

I wonder if they will start shipping with the new Turbine chainrings.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

If they do and your wanting the rings i'd be selling mine.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

We'll have to have a PM chat, that sounds interesting. :thumbsup:


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

So did anyone ever buy/try the Next SL crankset? How does it compare to XTR shifting? Are the new 2010 Turbine rings better/lighter than the 2009 Team rings?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

So there's always a downside to being an early adopter. The Next cranks I bought in December 2008 were some of the early ones, and I heard that they were having problems with the spider, some of the local XC racers were having problems with the spider failures. I had mine apart for cleaning today and spotted one split spider arm and one cracked. I dropped them off at the LBS and should have a replacement set by Tuesday or Wednesday.

It looks very much like they are fracturing along the shape of voids in the carbon thin section of the spider arms, like they weren't getting as much material into those areas under the same kind of pressure they were using for the rest of the crank arm. :skep:


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

rocky,

That really blows...









Now I'm curious and want to check mine but don't want to at the same time


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

I've been very cautious about not using the big ring as a bashguard on the carbon cranks, so this is just from applied torque. I've been climbing in the middle ring a lot since early April. I'm not so worried about the newer production, this is an issue they've known about with the early batches.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

saw the next SL at Eurobike. Piece of paper said 695g complete the set they had on scales was 710 though :skep:


----------



## pastajet (May 26, 2006)

I have banged and bashed the normal NEXT version for 6 months and it has been bombproof, it came in at 733 grams, refer to http://www.gramslightbikes.com/2009/07/race-face-next-xc-cranks-review.html


----------



## kentkreitler (Jul 29, 2006)

I have used mine for one whole season now. They are really good, in my opinion much better than XTR.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Rocky, will your new crankset come with the Turbine chainrings?


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

rockyuphill said:


> So there's always a downside to being an early adopter. The Next cranks I bought in December 2008 were some of the early ones, and I heard that they were having problems with the spider, some of the local XC racers were having problems with the spider failures. I had mine apart for cleaning today and spotted one split spider arm and one cracked. I dropped them off at the LBS and should have a replacement set by Tuesday or Wednesday.
> 
> It looks very much like they are fracturing along the shape of voids in the carbon thin section of the spider arms, like they weren't getting as much material into those areas under the same kind of pressure they were using for the rest of the crank arm. :skep:


Not to be devil's advocate, but you think you might have overtorqued them? I assume Race Face must have a torque spec. Was it followed, with a proper torque wrench? Not doubting the failure is manufacturing defect (or design defect)... Just covering all bases - don't take it personally 

I'd assume these are much more sensitive to proper torqueing procedure. I'm surprised that Race Face didn't co-mold a metal insert in there, just to avoid potential failures.

In any case - hope your new set works out! :thumbsup:

cheers


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

kentkreitler said:


> I have used mine for one whole season now. They are really good, in my opinion much better than XTR.


Better in what way? Lighter? Better shifting? Better Q-factor? Better how? :skep:


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

MI_canuck said:


> Not to be devil's advocate, but you think you might have overtorqued them? I assume Race Face must have a torque spec. Was it followed, with a proper torque wrench? Not doubting the failure is manufacturing defect (or design defect)... Just covering all bases - don't take it personally
> 
> I'd assume these are much more sensitive to proper torqueing procedure. I'm surprised that Race Face didn't co-mold a metal insert in there, just to avoid potential failures.
> 
> ...


How the heck could you overtorque alloy chainring bolts without the slot on the back stripping out or the head of the chainring bolt shearing off? :skep: It's hard enough just getting them snug without the chainring nut wrench popping out of the slot.

Apparently this is consistent the failures they had in the first batch that some of the local racers had, and mine were out of the first full production run from November 2008. My LBS has had a bunch come back with spider failures from the RMB Element Teams that were equipped with these. I'm hoping they came up with a way of getting the carbon mush into the spider tabs, as these have visible voids and flow marks out near the edges.

Supposedly the replacements are coming with the new Turbine rings as the LBS asked me to bring the chainrings and all the chainring bolts back with the crank arms.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

w00t! Let us know if the new rings seem any better than the old ones and how they compare to XTR shifting.


----------



## Jamie_MTB (Nov 18, 2004)

After seeing Rockuphill's, I checked mine  they're also cracked!

Anybody know what the warranty is?

BTW I haven't removed the original chain rings!


----------



## GiantMartin (Sep 12, 2007)

Not only can you get them in orange, RF has them available in about 8 colours I believe.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

toons101 said:


> After seeing Rockuphill's, I checked mine  they're also cracked!
> 
> Anybody know what the warranty is?
> 
> BTW I haven't removed the original chain rings!


It's at least a year, but this is a known issue so it shouldn't be a problem. A couple of local racers have apparently sheared all 4 of them off completely. I should receive my replacement set this week. I want to take a look at the spider tabs before I install them just to see if there's any visible voids or swirl marks in the carbon.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Rocky Mountain is putting these cranks on the 2010 Vertex 90. I hope Race Face have solved the problem.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

limba said:


> Rocky Mountain is putting these cranks on the 2010 Vertex 90. I hope Race Face have solved the problem.


And on the 2009 Altitude 90, where you're much more likely to encounter a regular chainring/log meeting.

I currently have the XTR cranks back on the carbon hardtail, it weighs 20.5 pounds with the XTR cranks and the Next SL 3/4" bars, compared to 20.3 pounds with the Next SL cranks. That might end up being another 0.2 pounds that I live with to get the reliability I want if the replacement Next cranks develop the same problem.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

I didn't look at the full suspension bikes. I almost bought a carbon Vertex this year but I'm glad I waited. Let us know how your new cranks hold up Rocky.


----------



## cerro (Sep 26, 2005)

Anyone know the q-factor of these crankset?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Same as the Deus, 170mm.


----------



## ginsu2k (Jul 28, 2006)

Wow. That's a pretty bad failure as all the cracks look to be from normal crank loadings, so it is certainly a design issue. Can't imagine how much that will cost them, no wonder Shimano has never played the carbon game on their cranks. 

I'm really surprised they make spiders out of carbon, it just seems like there isn't any chance for their to be enough material there for it to be truly bombproof. I'm pretty sure I would never spend my money on Carbon cranks unless they had an alloy spider.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

ginsu2k said:


> I'm really surprised they make spiders out of carbon, it just seems like there isn't any chance for their to be enough material there for it to be truly bombproof. I'm pretty sure I would never spend my money on Carbon cranks unless they had an alloy spider.


The carbon spiders on FSA K-Force Lights have no problems.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

This problem has been solved in the newer versions, right?


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

sfer1 said:


> This problem has been solved in the newer versions, right?


The jury is still out. Check back in 6 months for the answer.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

From what my LBS was saying it was the early production models that had the problem, we'll soon see. I have to phone them today and see if the replacements have arrived. It's been the local racers that have had the problems, mostly on the RMB Element Team bikes. So I guess I should be happy that my pins are being lumped in with local power house riders.


----------



## Vegard (Jul 16, 2009)

I emailed RF about figuring out wether or not mine where from an early batch, I got the below reply..



> We have seen less than 10 cases with the issue in the crank spider out of the thousands that we have made so far. It is doubtful that you will encounter such a issue.


Which leads me to believe that A) RF is trying to do damage control or B) The few users who have had issues talk louder than the people without.

Either way I hope mine don't fail! Knock on wood, toss salt and so forth.


----------



## Megaclocker (Sep 28, 2005)

A fews racers that I know in Quebec cracked some RF Next.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Well I feel really privileged to be part of such a small group.  The local racers were likely the first to get these cranks, so that's entirely possible. One of the racers is the Race Face rep, so that team was closely connected to the RF factory. My LBS assembled the bikes for the team, that's how they got my set of cranks so early. 

I'm hoping they're right about the reliability. Although like toons101 discovered below, there may be some early cranks that have broken but not failed completely yet.


----------



## kentkreitler (Jul 29, 2006)

I said earlier that I'm very happy with the cranks. Well I am. But, I have to had a crank failure. Mine separated from the shaft. Felt like there always was some play with the BB, the I pushed on the drive side arm and it moved. I had been doing some races on it, never smashed into anything. It was just som manufatcuring error. RF replaced everything VERY quickly, now I'm more than happy with the cranks. In my opinion better than XTR. Easier to use as 2x9, they are really light and easy to live with. I would guess at least as stiff as XTR.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

kentkreitler said:


> Easier to use as 2x9, they are really light and easy to live with. I would guess at least as stiff as XTR.


Are you running them as 2x9? What's your setup, front derailleur, rings, etc?


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

I know you weren't asking me, but I'm running 2x9, 40/27 Mattias Ti rings. I have the 40 mounted to the inside of the spider, with 1.8mm of spacers to push it further towards the frame. I have put the chainring nuts on the outside of the spider, with the bolts on the inside against the chainring. I figured there would be more metal/support of the chainring tab that way. I put the 64bcd 27 in the normal granny position. I'm using a Campy Record Ti compact front derailleur with a Parlee clamp, and SRAM X0 gripshift shifter. The shifting at the front was a little slow at 1st because of the lack of "shifting aids" on the Mattias ring. I have since put 4 shifting pins into the ring, and massaged some of the chainring teeth to speed the shifting, and it has made a night and day difference. I now have no trouble shifting up from the 27 to the 40 under almost any condition.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Cool. Thanks for the info. I think Mattias is working on shifting pins/ramps for his rings.


----------



## Thomas Anderson (Mar 10, 2006)

Going back to the earlier posts on this thread comparing M970 and RF Next SL to 'mom n pop shop' brands......The latter may well be lighter but unless you've had them on a rig to compare their stiffness then is it worth saving a handful of grams when some of your muscle power is going into bending material? All we get in terms of stiffness is the odd subjective comment about 'oh they *feel *crazy stiff' 
A German magazine did a stiffness test some time back, XT were significantly stiffer then XTR if I recall correctly. Someone must be able to come up with an equation that relates the flexibility of the crank arms for a given torque vs the additional energy required to lift the mass up the full ascent of a certain course.
Until then I'll go with the known top end brands that I know are tested for stiffness and not jsut weight


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Another thing to keep in mind when looking at stiffness tests is are *you *strong enough to flex the component? Some people get all freaked out about a bunch of numbers that really don't mean anything to them. If you feel any flexing it's probably coming from your bottom bracket/frame.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

limba said:


> Another thing to keep in mind when looking at stiffness tests is are *you *strong enough to flex the component? Some people get all freaked out about a bunch of numbers that really don't mean anything to them. If you feel any flexing it's probably coming from your bottom bracket/frame.


100% correct!

the "old" XTR crankset (you know-the grey ceanks made from '96 up to ca. '02) were tested the same way by that german magazine and had stiffness readings about 30% lower than the new XT crankset (see numbers on the last pic all on the bottom). However we have hundreds of wins and championships beeing won on that crank and it has been the industry standard, the benchmark for almost a decade.Everyone was saying this is a super-stiff crankset....by todays standards the old XTR would be the softest crankset available! Now think a moment if numbers actually have any benefit out on the trail....

Before you bend a crankset your tires,wheels and frame flex.A stiff crank might be a benefit for clydesdales or really powerful guys.

Just a sidenote:
the swiss Swisspower team (Nino Schurter,Florian Vogel,Frischi) won several medals and championships on FRM cranksets which are some of the flexiest integrated cranks as you can see in the test below....so who really gives a $hit on all these stiffness numbers?? Can we all win only on a Shimano Saint crankset which has the highest numbers? BS


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Finally got the fresh set of warranty replacement Next cranks (bad timing on Interbike's part - right in the middle of my warranty process). 

The new Next cranks with the new Turbine rings were 631gms w/o the BB. The newest RF BB was 107gms instead of 113gms. Using the new cranks with the XTR BB, they weigh 720gms. Taking a close look at the spider construction, the area around the chainring bolts has a much more continuous look to the carbon material, no obvious swirl marks where they broke last time. Stuck some Crankskins material on teh heel strike positions to get out ahead of the heel wear problem this time. We'll see how they hold up.


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

rockyuphill said:


> Finally got the fresh set of warranty replacement Next cranks (bad timing on Interbike's part - right in the middle of my warranty process).
> 
> The new Next cranks with the new Turbine rings were 631gms w/o the BB. The newest RF BB was 107gms instead of 113gms. Using the new cranks with the XTR BB, they weigh 720gms. Taking a close look at the spider construction, the area around the chainring bolts has a much more continuous look to the carbon material, no obvious swirl marks where they broke last time. Stuck some Crankskins material on teh heel strike positions to get out ahead of the heel wear problem this time. We'll see how they hold up.


No pictures









_____
Mine are still up and running....I'm not hard on them so I wasn't surprised when the spider was still intact.

Now weighing in at: 624g with bb.

Pictured below is the crankarms and Gara ring...539g









XTR bb with spacers / without sleeve...85.2g









The ExtraLite Gara (42x28t) rings..77g








The jury's still out on this ring set-up....I've only got one flat land ride in...They do shift real fast and clean...









The crankarms...454g








~Jake*......*


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

picture as requested...


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

Thankz Rock, it's a shame that RF couldn't of cut down on the ring weight...







There a good lookin' ring but too chunky..​


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

If it weren't the intense amount of ramping and shaping on the back side of the big ring, they could cut those CNC'd areas out entirely, but the back side is just wall to wall shift ramp. So far they seem to be pretty crisp in middle/big ring shifts, maybe almost XTR crisp.


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

rockyuphill said:


> If it weren't the intense amount of ramping and shaping on the back side of the big ring, they could cut those CNC'd areas out entirely, but the back side is just wall to wall shift ramp. So far they seem to be pretty crisp in middle/big ring shifts, maybe almost XTR crisp.


Have you weighed the rings and crankarms separately?​


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Hmmmm, so there is a noticeable difference between the old RF rings and the new Turbines?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

I didn't weigh this replacement set in pieces, but I did weigh the set of Turbine rings I bought when I discovered the cracks and they were 150gms for the three, so out of the 631gms, 150gms of that is chainring, or 481gms is the crank arms plus a set of chainring bolts.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

limba said:


> Hmmmm, so there is a noticeable difference between the old RF rings and the new Turbines?


Huge difference in the amount of machining on the teeth. These should not suffer chain suck like the Race Rings or Team RIngs.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

rockyuphill said:


> Huge difference in the amount of machining on the teeth. These should not suffer chain suck like the Race Rings or Team RIngs.


I only have chain suck in extremely muddy conditions using RF rings.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

As soon as the sharp edges wear a bit, the chain suck goes away on the Team/Race rings, but the machining on the Turbines rivals XTR for the amount of tooth shaping. We'll see how they wear compared to the Team/Race rings, which were like diamond.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Well mine broke today as well. 5 minutes into my ride, nice dry but sticky trails, come to a short climb, in the big ring with 4th cog in the back. Torquing away at the pedals pretty hard (man, I love the traction of those Race Kings), when *BAM!* pedals spin, my right foot comes unclipped, and the big ring looks like it's bent pretty bad. Turns out that 3 of the 4 chainring tabs broke, and contorted themselves in such a way that they twisted the chainring around. As soon as I unbolted the big ring (so I could keep riding in the small ring), the big ring was flat again.

Dropped the bike off at the LBS. They say it should take less than a week to get replacements. Here's hoping Lambert are on their game. Why my cranks need to cross the country from the West Coast to Montreal for warranty, when Race Face are a 25 minute drive from my house, I'll never understand.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

At least you don't have Interbike in the middle of your warranty claim. :skep:  It took about 3.5 weeks to resolve my claim because they had no inventory when my LBS contacted the rep, so they were making them just prior to Interbike and then the rep wasn't able to get the LBS the new cranks for over a week afterwards, but I did end up with a spare set of rings. So far so good.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

BlownCivic said:


> Well mine broke today as well. 5 minutes into my ride, nice dry but sticky trails, come to a short climb, in the big ring with 4th cog in the back. Torquing away at the pedals pretty hard (man, I love the traction of those Race Kings), when *BAM!* pedals spin, my right foot comes unclipped, and the big ring looks like it's bent pretty bad. Turns out that 3 of the 4 chainring tabs broke, and contorted themsleves in such a way that they twisted the chainring around. As soon as I unbolted the big ring (so I could keep riding in the small ring), the big ring was flat again.
> 
> Dropped the bike off at the LBS. They say it should take less than a week to get replacements. Here's hoping Lambert are on their game. Why my cranks need to cross the country from the West Coast to Montreal for warranty, when Race Face are a 25 minute drive from my house, I'll never understand.


Yours weren't the new Next SL cranks but the older model, right?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Yep mine were the original basic Next carbon cranks, as were Blown's, hopefully they have the spiders sorted out now for the SL's and the new AM version SIXC carbon cranks.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)




----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

So have Race Face started shipping the Ti spindled Next SL for consumers yet, or are you specially connected to have these? Could you please remove the chainrings and weigh the left and right crank arms on their own, including the left arm bolt and extraction cap?

My broken Next cranks are on their way in for warranty, and if I can convince the distributor to let me upgrade for a fee, I'll certainly go that route if there's a sufficient weight difference.


----------



## Jake Pay (Dec 27, 2006)

Universal's been shipping the Next SL's for a month now.....$$$:madman:

http://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=31724​


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

The Turbine rings weigh 151gms and the new BB weighs 107gms instead of 113gms. Everything else should be the cranks. Don't forget the pedal washers.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

BlownCivic said:


> So have Race Face started shipping the Ti spindled Next SL for consumers yet, or are you specially connected to have these? Could you please remove the chainrings and weigh the left and right crank arms on their own, including the left arm bolt and extraction cap?
> 
> My broken Next cranks are on their way in for warranty, and if I can convince the distributor to let me upgrade for a fee, I'll certainly go that route if there's a sufficient weight difference.












Just kidding. I got them from Universal Cycles. They were offering a 15% discount for returning customers. The 175mm ones sold out really fast though.

New bottom bracket including the 3 spacers -> 110g

Left crank arm including bolt and extraction cap -> 175g

Right crank arm including rings and bolts -> 432g

If the Turbine rings weigh 151g as rockyuphill said and the bolts 17,5g, the right crank arm with titanium axle should weigh around 263g.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

I was surprised to find that my replacement Next cranks still had steel granny ring bolts, I switched those out to FSA Torx type chainring bolts as they are the thickest wall versions of alloy bolts I've seen. Still saved something like 8gms. 

That sounds right for the BB, I weighed mine with one spacer. The XTR is still much lighter at 89gms with one spacer, and certainly no worse for lifetime.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Well I'll have to see what the LBS says about the upgrade. If it's not a lot of money I'll go for it, but that's only 20g. lighter than the set I sent in for warranty.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Yep you can make as big a difference with an XTR BB.


----------



## Tiffster (Jan 30, 2008)

To me that set looks over weight. There claimed is 695g and i remeber seeing as set sub 700g somewhere in Germany. 

FYI The graphics are available in other colours.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

rockyuphill said:


> Yep you can make as big a difference with an XTR BB.


No BB issues/potential here. Mine is integrated into the frame. Bearings are pressed in (not BB30).


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

BlownCivic said:


> My broken Next cranks are on their way in for warranty, and if I can convince the distributor to let me upgrade for a fee, I'll certainly go that route if there's a sufficient weight difference.


You are a brave man for sticking with a product for its weight after experiencing a failure like that.


----------



## BlownCivic (Sep 12, 2006)

Well I'm disappointed. I took the opportunity to upgrade my cranks to the newly available Ti spindle Next SL cranks for a small premium during my warranty claim for the failed chainring tabs on my Next cranks.

I got them today, and promptly threw them on the scale when I got home. 447g on my scales, the same scale that weighed my chromo spindle Next cranks at 458g. So that's a grand total of 11g lighter. Big frikin deal! I would say it's not worth it. What's done is done for me, but there's a premium to be paid for the Ti spindle, and at 10g. lighter, it's not worth it. I was expecting 35-45g based on the claimed weights by Race Face. So much for manufacturers claims.

Also, I have had a close look at the chainring tabs and I'm not 100% convinced that hese won't break as well.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

Well that blows.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

It took almost 10 months before I noticed the cracks in mine, we'll see if my new ones last longer.


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

ginsu2k said:


> Wow. That's a pretty bad failure as all the cracks look to be from normal crank loadings, so it is certainly a design issue. Can't imagine how much that will cost them, no wonder Shimano has never played the carbon game on their cranks.
> 
> I'm really surprised they make spiders out of carbon, it just seems like there isn't any chance for their to be enough material there for it to be truly bombproof. I'm pretty sure I would never spend my money on Carbon cranks unless they had an alloy spider.


Please do a FEA simulation and teach them on RaceFace to build a crankset.


----------



## limba (Jan 9, 2004)

I've broken two Race Face alloy cranksets. My 1997 Blizzard came with the original square taper bb cranks which took around 5-6 years to break. Race Face replaced that crankset for free with a new Deus crankset. Three years later I cracked that. Race Face replaced it with a new 2010 Deus crankset.
I didn't crash or hit anything. They just seem to break after a few years. Maybe from riding in lousy weather every winter.
I think it's great that RF stands behind their products but I don't think I'd buy a carbon RF crank, they seem fragile.


----------



## Slowup (Dec 16, 2009)

I've broken two Raceface next SL's in two years. The first, last year, had the pedal inserts come loose and the second had the spiders disintegrate just a month or so ago. I am now on a set of Sixc and my fingers are crossed. In both cases of failure, Raceface promptly within a week replaced the damaged cranks under warranty so I'm not complaining too much.


----------



## seppk (Apr 29, 2009)

ahhh all these raceface decals are making me go crazy! Other than that a nice weight similar weight to Extralite e-bones but without that sketchy, thin crankarm look on the e-bones.


----------

