quarq powermeter
I am in the process of buying a powermeter and had a few questions for everybody.
1. SRAM vs ROTOR...
2. more specifically SRAM compact vs ROTOR q rings of compact vs standard (keep in mind that rotor compact q rings can only be in the OCP 3 position b/c of the BCD 110 where the standard can take on any of the OCP positions)...
and now for the esoteric question... Does anybody believe in the q rings and can they site anything outside of the website which has a couple of european studies with an n=10. I am leaning towards the SRAM Quarq compact. Thanks
Eric
0
Comments
Eric,
Sorry, I don't know much about Rotor or Q-Rings, am curious about them, but I'm also a Quarq dealer and offer a discount to EN athletes. Email me at rich@endurancenation.us if you're interested.
Eric, first, I want to let you know I bought a Quarq Cinco in the FSA SLK-light version about a year ago and I love it. Since then SRAM bought Quarq and they are phasing out all the other cranksets except the SRAM branded ones. But for now I believe the FSA is still available. I rode with it "as is" for the past year, including using it for IM Canada. I have the Dura Ace 7900 Di2 drive train on my tri bike. You can put the DA chain rings on the FSA cranks to complete the component set and get the "A" compatibility as Shimano calls it. I have bought the chain rings and next week plan to bring the bike to Cycles Unlimited to have them remove the cranks/power meter and have it sent to Quarq for re-calibration. I have seen Shimano chain rings put on the SRAM version of the Cinqo, too. One of the guys that rides with OCC has that set up (even though it is kind of weird to see that mix it is compatible). Gary Locke, don't know if you know Gary, but he is very involved with Ozarks Cycling Club has a Rotor crankset and likes it. The technology has been around for a while, but no one else seems to have adopted it so that makes me kind of skeptical. As for the compact versus the 53/39, what are you riding now? That question should not be dependent on whether you have a power meter or not. BUT, in general, it is my belief that when you are talking about a TT/Tri bike set up you would want the larger chain rings (larger equals big gear equals potential for going faster). Some pros actualy use 54 tooth chain rings on their bikes. If you can turn it you should burn it, I think. Unless you are buying the power meter for a very specific race with lots of climbing, then personally I think you should get the 53/39. You can always get an 11/28 for your rear cassette, and that's plenty. Just my 2 cents.
See this super awesome wiki post by Dr Willam Jenks, WSM
My suggestion is go with the SRAM if you are getting a Quarq. The reasons why:
- The S9XX GXP crank can go into just about any frame. standard english or Italian threaded BBs with just the bearings. BB30, BB30PF, BBright, BB90, BB86 all work as well with the GXP
- The S9XX SRAM cinqo is compatible with all SRAM S9XX cranks. The cinqo is attached to the crank with 3 T30 torx bolts and you can easilly swap it yourself. This may not seem like a big deal but it allows you to very esaily switch type of crank GXP or BB30 or length of crank 175 - 165 etc, without having to buy a new quarq
- One 8mm (or 10mm on BB30) bolt is all that is needed to remove the crank. I've had the same one for over 2 years and swapped it a TON and never had an issue, but if you were to strip the bolt...see above as you can easily replace just the crank, yourself.
- As mentioned SRAM owns Quarq, so guess what they make the most of
- It's a very proven crank that has been around for years without issues
The Rotor crank has one advantage in my mind, they make it down to 155mm, but SRAM is planning to release a 165 mm S9XX (originally this summer, but that hasn't happened yet that I'm aware of).
I have never tried Q rings, but my theory is if they were so great, way more people would be using them.
For 99% of HIM and IM athletes a compact is a better choice. If you are a stud on the bike, racing short course only, or only super flat races then a standard *might* make more sense. See the post Rich shared.
BTW, I say S9XX as SRAM actually makes an S900, S950, and S975, as well as a Bontrager branded and the original TruVativ version of this crank.... all are 100% backwards compatible.
Also - I scored a sweet deal on it through Coach "I Hate Swim Gadgets and Use Lost And Found Swim Stuff on Purpose" Strauss. :-)
It's a great set-up. To quote my new favorite movie Project X, "It's a big time play for a big time player"....