Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    576

    R9100 vs. hollowgram sisl2

    I currently have a Cannondale hollowgram sisl2 with spidering, no issues at all, but, i really like the New shimano r9100 crankset.

    can anyone provide a review of the new r9100 crankset?

    thank you
    2014 EVO Di2, 7970 Di2
    2017 Shimano PD-9100 Pedals
    2012 Shimano7970 Di2
    2014 Centric Carbon Clinchers, 38mm and 60mm
    Second set of whees: Shimano 7900 C35 tubulars

  2. #2
    Forever a Student
    Reputation: MMsRepBike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    4,177
    I just opted for the 9100 over the SISL2.

    170mm 50/34 on the 9100 was 612 grams.

    I chose the 9100 for it's improved chainline over previous generation cranksets. It's really the big upgrade to the crankset for this generation. Sure the arm is a little beefier and it has the new color and all, but the improved chainline is the real benefit. Most bikes have short chainstays so it makes a noticeable difference.

    I'm not sure if it's just the crankset or not or if the front mech has anything to do with it, or if so how much, but I don't have to trim anything on the new 9100 setup. All 22 gears with no trimming needed at all. For someone like me who shifts the front constantly and ranges the back constantly as well, this is a big quality of life improvement over previous generations.

    The SISL 2 is known to eventually crack and fail, doesn't have the best reputation for long term durability. It's nice and all but I love the 9100 crank and am thankful I went with it, wouldn't change it for the world. There's no other crank I'd rather have, not even a THM or whatever. Looks are subjective, I think it's fine.

    Oh, because of the new chainline, the new 9100 crank is not compatible with any previous generations of front mechs, only the new stuff. Something to note.
    use a torque wrench

  3. #3
    coaster
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,001
    Quote Originally Posted by MMsRepBike View Post
    I just opted for the 9100 over the SISL2.

    170mm 50/34 on the 9100 was 612 grams.

    I chose the 9100 for it's improved chainline over previous generation cranksets. It's really the big upgrade to the crankset for this generation. Sure the arm is a little beefier and it has the new color and all, but the improved chainline is the real benefit. Most bikes have short chainstays so it makes a noticeable difference.

    I'm not sure if it's just the crankset or not or if the front mech has anything to do with it, or if so how much, but I don't have to trim anything on the new 9100 setup. All 22 gears with no trimming needed at all. For someone like me who shifts the front constantly and ranges the back constantly as well, this is a big quality of life improvement over previous generations.

    The SISL 2 is known to eventually crack and fail, doesn't have the best reputation for long term durability. It's nice and all but I love the 9100 crank and am thankful I went with it, wouldn't change it for the world. There's no other crank I'd rather have, not even a THM or whatever. Looks are subjective, I think it's fine.

    Oh, because of the new chainline, the new 9100 crank is not compatible with any previous generations of front mechs, only the new stuff. Something to note.
    Do you have a 135/142 disc frame?

  4. #4
    Forever a Student
    Reputation: MMsRepBike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    4,177
    Quote Originally Posted by Lelandjt View Post
    Do you have a 135/142 disc frame?
    No. Disc brakes have no place in my riding style or terrain.
    use a torque wrench

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by MMsRepBike View Post
    Oh, because of the new chainline, the new 9100 crank is not compatible with any previous generations of front mechs, only the new stuff. Something to note.
    That's the official stance. The unofficial stance is that the new crank works with the old derailleur 99% as well as the new derailleur. That said, the new crank doesn't impress me, the new front derailleur however should be on the upgrade list for anyone with 11sp right now. It's that nice.

  6. #6
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    576
    i am assuming that when you (rcb78) say that it does not impress you is becasue of lookss, correct?

    or have you used it and found something you did not like?

    let me know.
    2014 EVO Di2, 7970 Di2
    2017 Shimano PD-9100 Pedals
    2012 Shimano7970 Di2
    2014 Centric Carbon Clinchers, 38mm and 60mm
    Second set of whees: Shimano 7900 C35 tubulars

  7. #7
    coaster
    Reputation: Lelandjt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,001
    Quote Originally Posted by MMsRepBike View Post
    No. Disc brakes have no place in my riding style or terrain.
    Does the 9100 crank place the chainrings farther outboard? I've always owned short chainstay bikes with 39/53, 11-23 and haven't noticed that the chainrings were farther inboard than ideal. I'm curious about this chainline change and why it's better on normal roadbikes. I expected it was wider to work better with the wider rear ends coming on disc bikes.

  8. #8
    Forever a Student
    Reputation: MMsRepBike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    4,177
    Quote Originally Posted by rcb78 View Post
    That's the official stance. The unofficial stance is that the new crank works with the old derailleur 99% as well as the new derailleur. That said, the new crank doesn't impress me, the new front derailleur however should be on the upgrade list for anyone with 11sp right now. It's that nice.
    Agreed. Like most of the official Shimano limitations, I'm sure this one isn't that big of a deal. Probably compatible on the vast majority of frames still.

    Agreed on the front mech as well. That may just be the majority of my quality of life improvement if not all of it. The chainline move might not be that big of a deal in reality. The front mech may be the real star here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lelandjt View Post
    Does the 9100 crank place the chainrings farther outboard? I've always owned short chainstay bikes with 39/53, 11-23 and haven't noticed that the chainrings were farther inboard than ideal. I'm curious about this chainline change and why it's better on normal roadbikes. I expected it was wider to work better with the wider rear ends coming on disc bikes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Velonews
    Finally, Shimano updates its four-arm crank with a wider crank arm for added stiffness. But this doesnít mean itís heavier. Shimano removed materials from the crank where it wouldnít affect stiffness, keeping the whole systemís weight down compared to the previous model. The new design also moves the chain line half a millimeter outboard, which accommodates bikes with shorter chain stays or those built for disc brakes, without increasing the Q-factor.
    Yes it does. It's made for bikes like mine with short chainstays of 405mm or less or for bikes with the wider disc brake rear hub spacing.

    It's better for short chainstays because it allows for cross chaining more with less issues of rubbing. Better chainline and clearance in some gears is all.

    Half a millimeter though... not sure how big of a deal it is.
    use a torque wrench

  9. #9
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by veloci1 View Post
    i am assuming that when you (rcb78) say that it does not impress you is becasue of lookss, correct?
    Yes, no, maybe? I don't dislike the looks, but they don't wow me, at least not on my bike. When it comes to product like this I don't just grade it based on if it's ever let me down. I've ridden this and other cranks, some have let me down, some have not. The DA line of cranks (this included) have not ever let me down, but there are others that have performed equally well for me. I grade them based on performance, cost, ring choice, frame compatibility, weight, looks, durability and upgrade options like power. Without turning this into a x vs y debate, the DA cranks don't tick enough boxes to get me excited. I guess at some point along the line just working was no longer enough for me. This might sound a little esoteric, but I like my components to not just work well together, but actually 'fit' together too and complement each other and bike itself at the same time.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    385
    Not sure if I read your post right, but it doesn't place the rings farther outboard, it places the small ring 0.4mm farther INBOARD. The actual specs for both the FC-9000 and FC-9100 show the same chain line of 43.5mm. Though the way chain line is measured I'm not sure how you can move one ring but not the other and not alter chain line, in this case by .2mm.
    By spacing the rings .4mm farther apart, it allows people to cross chain small/small on short chainstay bikes (down to 405mm) without catching the chain on the big ring pins and ramps, this is straight from the guys inside the building at SAC.
    The functional difference to the front derailleur that creates the incompatibility is that the new derailleur can move farther inboard than existing models.

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    576
    thank you for all the feedback.

    just ordered a set and a Praxis adaptor, i will provide feedback on how it works on my EVO.


    give me a couple of weeks.
    2014 EVO Di2, 7970 Di2
    2017 Shimano PD-9100 Pedals
    2012 Shimano7970 Di2
    2014 Centric Carbon Clinchers, 38mm and 60mm
    Second set of whees: Shimano 7900 C35 tubulars

  12. #12
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    10
    Not sure if it's much help, but I have a caad12 with 9100 front mech, and 10 arm spidering that comes with the sisl2. I just have the si arms. Going from the 5800 fd to the 9100 fd was life changing. Not needing a barrel adjuster alone was enough to sell me. It is pretty easy to setup, and shifts great.
    I did just go from a 105 11-28 to a sram xg-1190 11-25. After doing that, I notice I get a lot more rub with the small ring. The big gears are noisy in the back (I've heard the red cassettes can be that way), once I hit 13t I a little get rub even with trim. Big ring is fine, all the way across the cassette (big gears still noisy though).

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    385
    Rubbing the big ring while on the small ring up front and crossed in back is what Shimano wanted to address by moving the small ring inboard. In fact, the new DI2 software that will enable synchro shift on road will have provisions for dis-allowing small small combos with certain chainring setups.
    As for the Red cassette, yes it can make a little more noise. It should die down a bit as the cassette goes through a sort of break in process, especially in the largest Al ring. I notice it more in the 11t, but the rest of mine is pretty quiet now. At least on the bike, the way the sound reverberates I can't hear it any more, but the guy next to me on the road says it's pretty loud still.

  14. #14
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    10
    Thanks for the reassurance with the red cassette. I kind of like the louder ratcheting sound. Here is a pic of my chainline for the OP if it helps. Thats with the 109mm hollowgram crank, spidering sl, shimano 105 chain, 9100 fd, 105 rd, xg-1190 cassette

    Don't flame me for the frayed cable end. I'm waiting to get my elite link kit to replace it all!

Similar Threads

  1. Cracks - Hollowgram SiSL2 cranks
    By cooldollar in forum Cannondale
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-21-2016, 01:41 PM
  2. Hollowgram SL and Si and SiSL2
    By ARPRINCE in forum Cannondale
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-24-2016, 08:51 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-22-2014, 07:35 PM
  4. Hollowgram SI/SiSL2 Crankset Question
    By nordy643 in forum Cannondale
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-17-2014, 12:29 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-29-2014, 03:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •