Shimano's compact crank - FC-R700
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    34

    Shimano's compact crank - FC-R700

    Hi there, does anyone have any experience with Shimano's compact crank? As far as performance grade, are these cranks in line with D/A, Ultegra, or 105???

    I am thinking about going compact on my ride, but most of the reviews I've seen are related to FSA's. My bike was initially set with an FSA compact, but I was never able to get it to shift properly, so ended with regular Ultegra crank. I still want to go compact, but don't want to have to deal with any compatibility problems.

    My bike's set: 2005 Litespeed Teramo, Full Ultegra 10 drive train (currently with the Ultegra crank also.

  2. #2
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: jparman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    335
    That is going to be an Ultegra level crank as stated in Bicycling Magazine, April 2006 pg. 114. The article also states that it works with traditional (non-compact) front derailleurs.

    Regards

    jparman

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    38

    compact crank great product

    I bought one of these to replace the durace 10 speed crankset. It fits in without any other modifications and takes about 15 -30 minutes. It is heavier then the durace but works very well.
    It is 34-50, I just trimmed the front deraiuller adjustment screw slightly.

  4. #4
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3
    I just took my second ride with my new FC-R700 crank and couldn't be happier. I'm running an Ultegra 9 spd rear (12/26), 50/34 front, a front derailleur, chain, and bottom bracket from the Ultegra 10 spd group. Don't know whether it's the upgrade to the new front derailleur or the chainrings on the crank setup, but it shifts remarkably quick and smooth. Instantaneous! And the only thing that would make the hills any easier would be a triple or a motor. The reviews are filled with people who say they have problems with shifting, dropped chains, etc. so I went with Shimano because I didn't want any hassles. And, I got exactly what I hoped for. I recommend it highly.

  5. #5

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    68
    I tried it and shifting was perfect even riding uphill and standing on the pedals.

  6. #6

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1
    What are the advantages, if any, of using a compact crank? My wife just upgraded my entire bike, including new paint job from Trek, new wheels...the works. She got me an Ultegra Compact Crank set and I want to know if I am going to lose any top-end speed.

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3

    Still loving my compact

    If you could push your biggest gear combination and max out your cadence before, then yes, you could have a decrease in top speed. I was running a 53/12 and even down a big hill have a little left rpm wise. So for me, the 50/12 combination has been just fine, the closer gear ratios have been great, and having a 34/26 low combination has been wonderful for those really steep hills we have here in Missouri. My only complaint is that I find that I have to shift between the small and large chainrings a lot more often due to the lower maximum speed resulting from the switch from a 39 to a 34 small ring up front. But, the setup shift so incredibly fast, it's really not an issue. I just have to remember the some of the speed I used to ride in my small chainring now requires a shirt to the big one.

  8. #8

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1

    Gain at both ends with compact crank.

    If your cassette is 11-23, you can gain both easier and harder peddling with a compact crank.
    To see the numbers, go to the gears computer at sheldonbrown.com/gears. To understand why, just know that dropping from 53 to 50 on the large chain ring is more than compensated for by dropping from 12 to 11 on the cassette. Meanwhile, a 34 T chainring paired with a 23T cassette is still easier to peddle than a 39T chainring and a 25T cassette. You can gain on both ends. The risk is that some compact cranks don't work as well and the chain slips off due to the bigger change from 50 to 34 teeth when compared to the smaller change from 53 to 39.

  9. #9
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    72
    I have the FC R700 and like the other posters said, it shifts wonderful. I run a 25-12 and run out of gears on some of the downhills but never close on the flats. I was just in CO for the Bicycle Tour of CO and I ran out of gears just about everytime I went down, so I just jumped on a big guys wheel.
    I am a stronger climber than most of the people I ride with and I enjoyed having a 25 on the rear for the CO ride, I needed no more gears. If the hills around your area are not and long, you maybe fine with a 23-11. Whole reason to have a compact is improve climbing ability so I personally will leave the 25 on.
    The neg about this crank: if your into weight, most FSA carbon compacts are lighter.
    Just one guys opinion, I have had the crank on for 4 months.

  10. #10

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    39
    I've put about 1000k on my set in the past two months and absolutely love it. The shifting is SUPER crisp compared to my old FSA setup - as Roadkill said it's instantaneous. Never missed a shift or dropped a chain and it doesn't complain even shifting on hills. Well worth the extra weight over the FSA IMHO.

    g

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    72
    Guero,
    I was just curious, what kind of FSA crank did you have? Was it a carbon compact or standard crank?

  12. #12

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    39
    My old setup was Gossamer standard 53/39 x 27/12. In making the switch to the FC-R700 I now run 50/34 x 23/11. Gives me a higher high and lower low. Great spread - the only gears I'm missing vs. a standard spread are smack in the middle - I honestly don't notice any loss.

    I'm sorry, I don't have any experience on FSA's compact cranks, but the quality of shfting in changing over to Shimano is huge! From what I hear Shimano can't be beat for shifting performance and based on my experience so far I'd whole heartedly agree.

    Some things you buy for chache and less for the performance. The R700's are all about performance. I can honestly say they are worth every penny. Don't buy them for the looks (there are better looking cranks) or the weight (they're heavier than most by a few grams). If you're looking for a true upgrade in shifting performance and want a wider range without going triple, these are your ticket. I'd pay an extra $100 to hold on to the set I have.

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    727
    I just read the Velownew's (?) article on the Ultegra FC-700 review. It was glowing. I mean this is a real sleeper setup. They said it shifted flawlessly with 9 or 10-speed. Plus it weighs the same as a DA crank at 740 grams and is priced around $270 list to boot. It's a way cheaper compact setup compared to Campy.

  14. #14

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    57

    Warm Up 39 vs 34

    I like to spin on warm up and recovery rides. It seems to me the 34 would limit this. Is that true? I ride an Ultegra Crank 39/53 now on a Tarmac Expert. I have visions of some mountain riding next year and think this crank and set up would be the perfect gearing...

  15. #15
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    72
    If I understand the question correctly the answer is - you would spin at a higher cadence with the compact during your warm up and recovery ride c/w the standard setup. Thus not hendering spinning.

    My big draw to the compact has been the fact that I do not have to shift into the 34 very often.

    I was in CO earlier this year doing the Bicycle Tour of CO. The compact in my opinion made it a lot easier.

    Todd

  16. #16
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    82
    I'm thinking of a compact Ultegra crankset on a new frame build-up. Any other feedback on this crank?

    I think it sounds like a good compromise between a 53/39 and a triple.

  17. #17
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MisterAngular's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by steel fan
    I'm thinking of a compact Ultegra crankset on a new frame build-up. Any other feedback on this crank?

    I think it sounds like a good compromise between a 53/39 and a triple.
    I thought about going this route for the new bike I'm building, either the FSA SL-K compact or the Shimano compact crank, but I've decided to just go with a 12-27 rear cassette for now. In "Dura Ace" flavor, the 12-27 is only 27 grams heavier than the 11-23 so I don't feel like I am paying a significant weight penalty. I guess I will see about the slightly wider spacing amongst the gears when I get it built and actually get some riding time in.

    On the subject of gearing, I found this article to be interesting and informative:

    Bradley

  18. #18
    Los Barriles, BCS, Mexico
    Reputation: DaveT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,436
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterAngular
    I thought about going this route for the new bike I'm building, either the FSA SL-K compact or the Shimano compact crank, but I've decided to just go with a 12-27 rear cassette for now. In "Dura Ace" flavor, the 12-27 is only 27 grams heavier than the 11-23 so I don't feel like I am paying a significant weight penalty. I guess I will see about the slightly wider spacing amongst the gears when I get it built and actually get some riding time in.

    On the subject of gearing, I found this article to be interesting and informative:

    Bradley
    27 grams = 0.95239692 oz.
    Trying to cram the rest of my life into the rest of my life!

  19. #19
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: MisterAngular's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    112

    Holy significant digits, Batman!

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveT
    27 grams = 0.95239692 oz.
    It's more like 0.952396973 ounces, but hey... who's counting? :P Then again it isn't meaningful to impute more significant digits (precision) than you started out with, so would be more appropriate to say 0.95 ounces. To me, a single ounce is not significant and many compact cranks weigh more than the Dura Ace 53/39T (when you take into account the weight of the corresponding BB), so in that scenario using the 11-23 cassette wouldn't even save weight.

    Bradley

  20. #20
    Los Barriles, BCS, Mexico
    Reputation: DaveT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,436
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterAngular
    It's more like 0.952396973 ounces, but hey... who's counting? :P Then again it isn't meaningful to impute more significant digits (precision) than you started out with, so would be more appropriate to say 0.95 ounces. To me, a single ounce is not significant and many compact cranks weigh more than the Dura Ace 53/39T (when you take into account the weight of the corresponding BB), so in that scenario using the 11-23 cassette wouldn't even save weight.

    Bradley
    I was just making fun of weightweenieism, not that I don't practice it myself on occasions.
    Trying to cram the rest of my life into the rest of my life!

  21. #21
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    339
    I'm wondering about a compact crank as part of my cross bike build. I'm glad to read the shifting problems are a false rumor. Now I'm just wondering what people think about the pros and cons of the gear ratios associated with compact cranks and cross racing? Thanks for your insights.

  22. #22
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: Dr_John's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,914
    As others here have mentioned in the past, I really wish Shimano would make a DA compact. They make a DA triple, so I don't see why the wouldn't make a DA compact.

    I currently have an R700 on my rain bike. It's a great crank for the price.

  23. #23
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    727
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr_John
    As others here have mentioned in the past, I really wish Shimano would make a DA compact. They make a DA triple, so I don't see why the wouldn't make a DA compact.

    I currently have an R700 on my rain bike. It's a nice crank.
    I don't think a DA compact would be much of a difference from a R700. Only the platinum finish and maybe a tad lighter. Many have said the R700 shifts as good as a DA7800, and it looks virtually identical, so . . . the R700 is basically a DA compact at an Ultegra price!
    Last edited by Clevor; 02-19-2007 at 05:25 PM.

  24. #24
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    475

    its all about the tooth difference

    Quote Originally Posted by RoadLoad
    I'm wondering about a compact crank as part of my cross bike build. I'm glad to read the shifting problems are a false rumor. Now I'm just wondering what people think about the pros and cons of the gear ratios associated with compact cranks and cross racing? Thanks for your insights.
    I haven't tried a compact crank yet but recently changed to a 48t big ring instead of a 53 on my cross bike, using a ultegra octalink crank. I can actually use the 48t on the cross cours and the smaller gap between front rings makes for faster shifting and no need for a intermediate rear shift like with a normal road double. The 50t on the compact cranks is probably just a little too big for cross racing use and the large difference in ring tooth gap- especially with a 34t would mean too big of a gap between rings, plus a 34t is probably too small for cross. With a compact crank a 36/48 or 46t big ring would be better. In cross I don't see any real advantages to a compact crank, a regular road double with 48/39, or 48/38, or 46/39 or 46/38, in comination with a 8-9-or perhaps a 10speed cassette that is 12-25 or 26 or 27.
    And as far as road ridding the cross bike I haven't missed the 53t I can still sprint on the flats up to 35+ mph and pedal down hills at up the 45mph, after which pedaling doesn't do too much good usually anyway.

  25. #25
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by RoadLoad
    I'm wondering about a compact crank as part of my cross bike build. I'm glad to read the shifting problems are a false rumor. Now I'm just wondering what people think about the pros and cons of the gear ratios associated with compact cranks and cross racing? Thanks for your insights.
    I have recently had to replace my crakset so I've mounted a Shimano compact (should the occasion of a big climb arises) as a simpler and lighter solution instead a triple chainring.

    Despite the fact that it shifts perfectly from one chainring to another, (even with an old Shimano 600 derailleur for 8 speed) I find unconfortable the big gap between both rings:

    I can speed my legs up to 19 miles/h with the 34 chainring and the 14 teeth procket, but when I engage the big ring, I have to step back 4 sprockets to the 19 teeth one. Because I often cruise around 20 miles/h this made my chain beeing always "crossed", so I've replaced the 34 chainring for a 40-th (TA Specialites) and I will get a 46 or 48 teeth for the big one.

    The (46 X 12) gives 32 mil/h at 95 rpm and anyway, while descending I usually pull the brake before the speedometer reaches such “high” number.

    I'll reserve the original rings for the big days = long climbs and exhilarating descents.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.