Shimano Dura-Ace 9000 crankset: Both a standard and a compact. Brilliant!

GMAN 19030

So I ordered one of the new Trek Speed Concepts earlier this week.  It comes with the new 11 speed Dura-Ace Di2 groupset which includes the new 9000 series crankset.  I planned on removing the crankset and replacing it with my Quarq.  Then I started reading a little more about it.  Shimano designed the new Dura-Ace crankset to be both a standard and a compact.  You can run a 53/39, 50/34, 52/36 (or some combination) without having to worry about "standard vs compact."  I love it!

Unfortunately, Trek only offers it with a 53/39.  I would prefer the 52/36 but I'm not going to fret about it now.  I can swap those chainrings out eventually and proper cassette selection would give me the gearing I need anyway (like running a 11-28 for races like IMC, IMCdA, and IMMT and 11-23 for my normal flatland riding).

Then there's the dilemma of power.  I love the flexibility of the new Dura-Ace crankset so much that I'm seriously considering ditching the Quarq and going with a Stages power meter as they have a DA9000 crank.  Stages had apparently rectified their launch issues and looks like their PM works nicely now.

Paul Hough

Bob - please clarify. Are you saying they designed the crankset holes to accept any of the 3 combinations of rings? That is pretty slick. I just read about the 52/36 compromise rings in Lava magazine. That is a slick idea so you can easily change your one size fits all crankset to a different set of chainrings depending on the course elevation profile!

GMAN 19030

Paul, exactly what I'm saying. They designed the new cranks with one bolt pattern that will accept a 53, 52, or 50 big ring and a 39, 38, 36, or 34 small ring. Thus, there's no standard vs compact argument with the new DA cranks. Of course, only DA 9000 rings work with the DA 9000 cranks so additional rings are probably not cheap. I'd guess $250-$300 for a set of rings.

A lot of shops are currently selling the DA 9000 crankset for $150 off and I'm contemplating buying a 52/36 crankset and selling the 53/39 as soon as I get the bike. Then I look at gear ratio charts and there's not a substantial/justifiable difference between a 53/39 or 52/36 with proper cassette selection so I'm not likely to go that route.

new2703

I have the new 9000 crankset. Currently with 50/34 set up. Love how it feels. Seems smoother and stiffer compared to q rings which I hated

Paul Hough

I am looking for another bike to add to my stable and I guess DA 9000 will be a strong consideration.

Keith Wick

Posted By Paul Hough on 18 Jul 2013 01:46 PM
Bob - please clarify. Are you saying they designed the crankset holes to accept any of the 3 combinations of rings? That is pretty slick. I just read about the 52/36 compromise rings in Lava magazine. That is a slick idea so you can easily change your one size fits all crankset to a different set of chainrings depending on the course elevation profile!

I just bought a Specialized Venge with a 52/36 on it. I like it very much so far with a 11/28 rear. Lots of flexibility.

gamb

Posted By Keith Wick on 18 Jul 2013 08:12 PM

Posted By Paul Hough on 18 Jul 2013 01:46 PM

Bob - please clarify. Are you saying they designed the crankset holes to accept any of the 3 combinations of rings? That is pretty slick. I just read about the 52/36 compromise rings in Lava magazine. That is a slick idea so you can easily change your one size fits all crankset to a different set of chainrings depending on the course elevation profile!

I just bought a Specialized Venge with a 52/36 on it. I like it very much so far with a 11/28 rear. Lots of flexibility.

My Venge came with that setup.  I liked it a lot.  I took it off to use my quarq (compact) but I wish stages has an arm that matched the specialized crank.  I'd like to have the 52/36 back

tgarson

I don't know anything about the DA-9000 crank specifically, but remember that the limitations of bolt pattern (130bcd vs 110bcd) are in how *small* you can go on the rings, not in how big.

There really is nothing stopping the industry from making every crank 110bcd (compact), and making 110bcd 53T chain rings, in fact you can get these already. The reason they likely don't is stiffness, but this is something that I'm sure could be addressed if they put some thought into it.

From a quick glance, it looks like the DA-9000 uses some intermediate BCD, combined with some other design elements to address the stiffness issues. Again, no reason why the rest of the industry probably couldn't agree on a new standard (a-la 120bcd) and probably do away with the compact v. standard dilemma forever.

Jeff Sullivan

My wife is running the Stages on her bike and it's working well. After comparing Stages to PT for a few rides, it appears to be about 5-10 w higher than PT. DCR and a recent ST review gives it thumbs up.

William Jenks

(and not to hijack the thread, but the 10 W difference from one meter to another doesn't mean one is "wrong" and the other "right". They could both be off. There's a normal range of a couple percent between all models...and in theory power ought to be a little higher on the crank than at the wheel due to mechanical losses in the drivetrain anyway.)

Anyway, this is good news. I hope down the line chain rings become as interchangeable as cassettes.

Wm

Dino Sarti

My P5 has the DA-9000 Di2 ring. Sadly, I have the stock 9000 crank with the standard rings and a new 9000 crank on the bike with compact rings. My issue was crank length. I wanted to run 165mm rather than the stock 172.5

Cary Blanco

Anyone know what the BCD is?

I'm guessing it's a 110BCD with fitted with 53/39 (more chainring).

GMAN 19030

Cary, I think it is a 110 but it has a 4 bolt X pattern as opposed the the usual 5 bolt Star pattern.

It's a game changer that will certainly drizzle down to the Ultegra gruppo probably next year.  SRAM has been put on notice.