Rotor MTB 104/64 BCD 3X9 3D Cranks

[}SkOrPn--7]

Some time back in a thread cranks or Q -Rings where a subject and Rotor was brought up and at the time I had a set on order. I wanted to use my Shimano XT cranks for another project and was wondering at the time what would be the upgrade. Rotor was always at the top of that list mainly because I wanted a change from Shimano and it was time for a change. I guess it was more of curiosity and looks that swung me to Rotor cranks and just to be able to place something else in the stable to evaluate. Rotor sure have a nice finish on there cranks plus a very good O-ring sealing system along with the ability to add or subtract spacers making fitting a variety of BB's and bottom bracket widths.

One thing I really liked was there very simple clamping system which was far superior than the Shimano's XT in that it has a single bolt that has to be unscrewed a little to spread the crank arm and slide over the spindle. Turn the bolt back in to it's neutral position and the non drive side crank arms is nice and tight fit even before you torque the bolt. Pre-loading the non drive cranks along with the "Q" factor is nothing different over the XT nor is the spindle fit on the bearings just a better sealing system from road grim and water.

Between the Shimano XT cranks and the 3D cranks there is very little in the feel while peddling but I do like that the crank arms come from the spindle out at a angle to where the pedals rest at the "Q" factor which I like. It gives greater foot clearance from heel strike on the crank arm compared to the Shimano. The 3D cranks have less flex in the crank arm when you load them up and are lighter over all but that isn't a factor in my books due to not being a weight weenie.

Over all better seals, more foot clearance, far superior bolt system, less flex and lighter but when on the stead riding wise nothing in it as far as the cranks alone is concerned. So for bang for buck Shimano XT wins hands down by a country mile and then some.

I will get some images up later.

Ricky

[}SkOrPn--7]

Here are the images and the weight is 600grms each but the Rotor cranks had the chainrings attached so not a great deal in it but they are lighter. As you can see by the below image the "Q" factor remains the same but as you can see the Rotor cranks taper from the pedal to the spindle allowing for more clearance off heal strike compared to the straighter design back to the spindle by Shimano as I mentioned above.



In my opinion nice looking crank arms.



Spacer that comes in different sizes to suit the different BB's and shell but in the image below you can see the recess that the O-ring sits in as the spindle passes through on both sides of the spacer to seal any water entering the BB. Such a simple little addition and I have hit them with a high pressure industrial washer (Not just a wash over but a real blast at all angles to try and push water past the seals) and no water gets in so on that front I have tested and they do what there supposed to do.



This image will give you a better idea of placement of spacer and O-ring on the spindle and when the BB is pressed up against the spacer you get that complete seal.



The below image shows the simple but more effective single bolt that holds the cranks on the spindle. You can loosen that bolt right off to the neutral position and the cranks remain tight on the spindle it's when further torque is applied to the bolt in an anticlockwise direction that this then splays the crank to allow it to be taken off the spindle and that I really like it's a nice feature.



Over all I'm impressed with the cranks and like the neat features they offer over the Shimano XT cranks but like I said bang for buck stick with Shimano.

Ricky

[John Lewis]

Neat.
I must have been thinking of a different Rotor crank. The one I recall had some gearing or something and gave a similar effect to Q rings.

John

[Phil]

Hi Ricky

Great Photos. I was eyeing these up from the webseller in the UK, but not a lot of photos - and no where near the level of detail you have presented.

Ended up getting a set of SRAM red 165mm 52/36 for $300 so went with these - yet to install on the Bacchetta, but I am looking at an M5 Carbon Medium Racer as well (still waiting on the quote - seems to be a common problem for recumbent people dealing with the Netherlands). I do like the look of the 3D cranks though, and seriously considering them for the future - if I like the 52/36 will get some Qrings for the Red cranks on the Bacchetta.

Cheers
Phil

[Joeblake]

Neat.
I must have been thinking of a different Rotor crank. The one I recall had some gearing or something and gave a similar effect to Q rings.

John

I think you probably mean these ones.
http://www.rotorbike.com/nueva/ingles/m ... t_rs4x.htm
http://www.rotorbike.com/nueva/pdf/RotorSystemCrank.pdf

It's a similar system to the old "Power Cam", which I have sitting in my shed.




Absolutely brilliant, pee'd all over the old elliptical chain rings (Shimano?). Back in the mid '80s I had two identical Roulandt recumbents set up with the Power Cam and the elliptical rings, and rode both for over a year, just to make sure I got a good feel. Loved the PC. Only difficulty I had was trying to bridge the gap between the two chain rings, 42 and 60!! I had to change the front rings by hand.

Am still considering buying the Rotor system, but I'd like to use it on a non-electric trike, so I may get a Greenspeed and have them set it up for me.

Joe

[}SkOrPn--7]

Hi John come to think of it I think it was your mango Velo thread where all this started and we veered off the subject a little and somewhere someone brought up Rotor to which I flapped my gums and made mention a set was on order. If what Joe has offered up then I too must have miss understood the Rotor cranks you were talking about and sorry about that.

Phil thanks mate if you need images of anything detailed more so than what I offered up then just holla and I will do all I can to help you should you go down the Rotor path at a later date and need more images to help with the decision making process. I ordered these Cranks at 165mm but due to an email I got saying that Rotor have yet to do another run of the shorter cranks which meant a big delay in my order so I decided to change tactics again and go with the 175mm being the same crank length as my XT cranks. I wanted the shorter cranks for spinning but then when the order was to be delayed I decided that I would much prefer to have the cranks for hi torque as hills when touring is an issue with heavy loads hence my decision to go back.

The 165mm crank length was always an experiment and I choose Rotor for this even if it meant money burnt but now I'm glad I never got them at 165mm. I will still do 165mm but do it on the cheap not place so much money into what might be a failure and not something I like.

Phil I don't think you have lost anything selecting the SRAM Red because I dare say there would be little in it as well bar weight being in SRAM's favour. Just be mindful that a complete set of cranks and Q-rings from OS will set you back about 700 clams US hence my bang for buck comment that Shimano XT wins hands down and then some. I already had the Q-Rings on the Shimano cranks so not such a big investment for me but even just the cranks still cost more than your SRAM Red cost you and I got them OS but here in OZ the cranks alone are near 700 plus coins. To be honest now that I have the Rotor cranks paying the money just for the looks is ok with me because they do look smart and if I was you I would get the Q-Rings and place on the SRAM Red to start with. I hardly notice I'm using Q-Rings but when I do pick up on it is hill climbing in the granny ring you do move through the dead spot quicker and lose less momentum in the stroke.

The M5 is a thing of beauty and would be something really great to have in the stable but at this stage John has me more captive in the Mango as I read his thread and all the others that have been there plus those who have ordered. Owning a M5 would be over indulging if I was to purchase a velo but I sure would look forward to your review if you do decide to bite the bullet and order an M5.

Ricky

[John Lewis]

Yes Joe, I think they were similar to what you have. Heres some info.
I think they eventually stopped making those (not posiive) and changed over to the Q rings which do much the same for less complexity and weight.

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/tech/?id ... tor_cranks

I think the ones Ricky has are by the same company but of course they aren't the mechanical contraption ones.
First I heard of them was years ago when I saw them mentioned on Chuck Hazzards blog about his early model Mango. He later updated to a quest.

john

[Baalzamon]

I'm finding that 'dead spot' more and more now. Hating stopping on hills with stop signs Definitely think a set of Q-rings are needed, but I'll wait until I sort out my rear wheel since that is either getting an Alfine 11 upgrade or a rohloff upgrade. And ofc that will affect the front

[Joeblake]

Given that "Wiggo" won yesterday's time trial using an elliptical chain ring set, I reckon that's going to cause a bit of interest. Perhaps if you're thinking of buying one yourself you might want to get in ahead of the rush.



Joe

[Phil]

Given that "Wiggo" won yesterday's time trial using an elliptical chain ring set, I reckon that's going to cause a bit of interest. Perhaps if you're thinking of buying one yourself you might want to get in ahead of the rush.



Joe

Hmm any specs? a Rotor Q-ring or something custom? My wife was just telling me that SKY Radio chips in 30 million pound a year - and they are not the only sponsor, so I guess money ain't that much of a problem if there is gains to be had.

They also use Pinarello Dogmas - but don't know there will be a queue for people to fork out $15K on Dogmas

[Joeblake]

Hmm any specs? a Rotor Q-ring or something custom?

I think this might be Wiggo's Wonder Wheel.

http://www.trainsharpcyclecoaching.co.u ... rings.html



About 240 pounds by the look of it.

Joe

[}SkOrPn--7]

Having used and still using Q-rings I reckon just by looking at the design of Wiggins his would pass the dead spot faster and because of the curve and box shape I reckon that you would build up to that higher gear then quickly pass the dead spot in the lower gear before building back up to the higher gear again as the chainring turns. I might be wrong but it's just my observation of the chainring shape that they might have one up on Q-ring.

Ricky

[Baalzamon]

Hmm only 130, or 110, no MTB rings