I’m going to be sending in my rotor spider for the upgrade program. So I’m going to move my bike from 7900 mechanical to 9070 Di2, what quarq should i get that will work with BBRight and the Di2?
One more detail to add, I currently have a Rotor BBRight to 24mm adapter in I assume all the SRAM GXP wouldn’t work, so I would need a BB30 and put the BBRight BB back in? Correct?
Quarq ELSA 10R
SRAM RED 22
SRAM RED
Thanks!
I’ve tried mixing Di2 9070 and SRAM components (Red crank and SRAM TT chainrings) but wasn’t happy with the results. Ultimately the Di2 servo motors are too powerful for the machined chainrings imo. Shift quality is also affected by the loss of Shimano’s dedicated ramps and tooth profiles. In short it works, just not very well.
If you want to go with a SRAM/Quarq power meter the Riken is you best bet. The RED and ELSA models use Exogram crank arms which as far as I can remember aren’t compatible with 3rd party chain rings. I say that because you should consider a set of Praxis Works chainrings if you going to slot it into a Shimano drivetrain. Praxis and Shimano are the only companies cold forging chain rings at the moment.
Each system has it’s pros and cons but if you want to retain the FC-9000 crank and or chainrings there’s Garmin, Pioneer, Power2Max, SRM, or Stages. Being able to use Shimano chainrings is handy. Last summer for a really big mountain ride I swapped the 39 on my 53/39 for a 36. Previously that wasn’t possible. It’s slightly out of spec. but it works surprisingly well.
For power I’ve ended up going with Power2Max. I don’t ride Look pedals, the Pioneer is an unknown quantity at this time, SRM was too expensive and I’m not totally comfortable with Stages only measuring the left crank arm.
I got the new Type S and Rotor 3D crank which uses a 24mm axle so it works with the Shimano bottom bracket standard out of the box. Shimano’s FC-9000 is a pretty light set of cranks. The Power2Max and Rotor 3D combination added a total 160g to my bike when using the Shimano Dura-Ace chainrings. Depending on your use case you might be able to go with one of Rotor’s lighter cranks. I needed 24mm and BB90 compatibility for my road and Tri bikes.
Image source: http://www.dcrainmaker.com/...s-compatibility.html
Quarq riken with praxis chainrings(classis stiffer then clover). You will also need a few chainring spacers(.6mm or 1.2mm made by wheels manufacturing). This will prevent a little bit of rubbing that happens when cross chaining in the small ring up front/ smallest ring on back. Shimano changed the spacing slightly with 11spd so that’s why you need these spacers if you’re going to use praxis chainrings.
I am currently running a quarq riken(BB30 works with BBright without adapters) with praxis(classic rings) with ultegra di2 11speed. After adding the spacers the shifting is great.
The absolute best setup would be a SRM dura ace 9000 crankset with the rotor BBright pressfit 46-24 BB.
Good luck
I am using a Shimano 7900 SRM on a BBright and it works great with electronic. I previously was using quarq, but after three returns, I gave up with them and bought a SRM. Best move I ever made. If you use 175 cranks, I have a spare you can have for $1300.
Thank you, you just nailed exactly what I was looking for.
I’ll still do the quarq swap, but will probably sell it, the power2max with shimano 4 hole is money!
curious how 4 hole shimano 110 BCD is ‘better’ than traditional 5 hole 110BCD.
Pros: you get to use shimano rings
Cons: you can’t use the rings of ANY other manufacturer.
well, shimano make great rings, BUT they are also really expensive.
I prefer to keep the drive train native, I think they just work better when the entire system is Shimano, or SRAM or Campy.
In addition to nebmot’s comments you could add:
with the 4 hole BCD design the crank doesn’t have to use symmetrical anchor points, thus they can make the crank stiffer by reinforcing the areas with higher loads.
reduce unnecessary material, making the crank lighter.
you get a broader range of chain ring combinations without having to change the crank. Effectively 1 crank arm can handle everything from a 34 to a 55. In the example I used earlier, although unofficial you can push the specs a bit so it’s perfectly possible to use a 36 with a 53 big ring.
Shimano chainrings are expensive, but they are also very good. With the 4 hole BCD design common to 105, Ultegra and Dura-Ace you can mix and match. For the 2 or 3 times a year I do a big mountain ride I’d quite happily use a 105 small chainring with a Dura-Ace big ring.
I prefer to keep the drive train native, I think they just work better when the entire system is Shimano, or SRAM or Campy.
Many, many people are using Quarq/SRAM with Di2, with no problems whatsoever.
And Quarq/SRAM with mechanical Shimano … Campy, etc. etc.
(I’ve done all of the above, and know others who have done so also. Don’t know anyone who’s had any problems)
Unless you’re an Olympic gold track sprinter, I dont See anyone complaining about crankarm stiffness.
Besides, it’s rarely crank flex tharts a problem, it’s the chainrings
Lighter- you’re already adding a powermeter. But fair, I’ll give you it’s lighter.
I cAn have the same range of chainring options as you on a compact. On a single crank. I have a 52-36 on my riken with 50-34 for climbing races, and a 38 chainring if I wanted it. If I wanted to I could get 55 tooth chainring for 110 with companies like Ta specialites. Shimano doesn’t make a 4 bolt 55 tooth yet.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m an engineer and can appreciate the engineering merits of the 4 bolt system. But I honestly think being locked in to proprietary shimano chainring for minimal advantage is more trouble than its worth at the moment. Sort of like campy’s unique bcd. If shimano can convince other players to go with 4 bolt 110 then maybe I’d see the point. But until shimano decides to open that standard to everyone I don’t think I’ll go that route.
Shimano doesn’t make a 4 bolt 55 tooth yet.
It’s expensive, but the 55T is on the market and easy to order. It’s too big for me so I have the 54.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m an engineer and can appreciate the engineering merits of the 4 bolt system. But I honestly think being locked in to proprietary shimano chainring for minimal advantage is more trouble than its worth at the moment. Sort of like campy’s unique bcd. If shimano can convince other players to go with 4 bolt 110 then maybe I’d see the point. But until shimano decides to open that standard to everyone I don’t think I’ll go that route.
In the final analysis I think this is all pretty marginal which is to say that I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer here. While I take your points on board, I just come out on the other side of the argument after all reasonable people with good intentions can still disagree. In my experience I’ve found maintaining drivetrain integrity makes for an easier life.