# Ciamillo Zero Gravity Gravitas Carbon Crank Version 2



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

Version 1










Version 2


----------



## threebikes (Feb 1, 2009)

I would be willing to put them on my bike and rack up some R&D miles.


----------



## wallymann (Jul 11, 2010)

*Neat*

a tubular design, similar to Rotor cranks, but in a CF/AL hybrid. the CF tubes have alot of bonding surface inside the AL ends.

not particularly streamlined, but kinda interesting in an industrial/transformer sort of way.


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

From a general engineering/structural point of view, 1 looks way better than 2. I'd go so far as to say 2 is just dumb and calls into question the competency and legitimacy of the designer/company, IMO.


----------



## The Human G-Nome (Aug 26, 2002)

looigi said:


> From a general engineering/structural point of view, 1 looks way better than 2. I'd go so far as to say 2 is just dumb and calls into question the competency and legitimacy of the designer/company, IMO.


Interesting take. #2 intrigues me while #1 looks like several of the others out there.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

Regardless of version 1 or 2, they are certainly value priced. 
I plan to buy (2) maybe (3) sets ASAP.


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

You should have added that there is a cover that will go over the arms. You can see where it mounts dues to the holes and milling of the ends. It will look like a standard crank and you can order in various colors.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

^ Yeah, isn't "version 2" going to be wrapped in the same fashion as version 1?

Either way, I don't get that tube structure, and they're forecast to be stupidly overpriced for the specification.


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

With the tube construction I can see the ability to order them in any crank length you want. They can quickly cut to length both the cover and tubes.


----------



## PaxRomana (Jan 16, 2012)

What the hell is that thing attached to the bottom bracket in the 2nd picture? 

Tell me that's not a crank.


----------



## maxxevv (Jan 18, 2009)

Those are the innards of the revised crank design. Its not how the crank will look like. If you cut up any of the popular carbon cranks, they do not look great on the inside either.


----------



## CHARLES M (Oct 17, 2012)

early pic's.

These will be adjustable for length (each side) and Q factor can be reworked to spec.

The "shell" that will go on the second isnt like the first design. These are two pretty different designs. I have the wireframe files for both sets and the second with tubes is both a stiffer and fairly substantially lighter design.


----------



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

*The Cover...*

I plan on having a set (without cover) in matte black tubes with black anodized bits next week.

The cover will arrive to me after (hopefully matte finish or even unidirectional).


----------



## latman (Apr 24, 2004)

is there a 3rd "hole" in the alloy end pieces for another carbon tube ?


----------



## shoemakerpom2010 (Apr 25, 2011)

#2 looks as cool as the Alex Pong cranks I owned once


----------



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

Yes, the first image was during production to my understanding. There may or may not be a 2 tube crank for lightweights but we'll see as production makes way.


----------



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

*Complete*

<img src="https://www.carbonlord.com/GravitasCrank.jpg">


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Now that they're out, and they're not even that light for the price, is it time to call them the stupidest crank design in recent years, or do we still have to wait a bit ?


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

watch it!, watch it!.......the boys from ZERO G are gonna get all upset.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

moskowe said:


> is it time to call them the stupidest crank design in recent years, or do we still have to wait a bit ?


mmmmmmmmm.............I think you just did. no more waiting.


----------



## nhluhr (Sep 9, 2010)

moskowe said:


> Now that they're out, and they're not even that light for the price, is it time to call them the stupidest crank design in recent years, or do we still have to wait a bit ?


I'd be concerned that the only thing preventing that parallelogram structure from flexing is the relative small surface area bonded between the carbon and aluminum. I'd much prefer some sort of triangulated structure. And maybe it's just me, but the spider looks flimsy.


----------



## terzo rene (Mar 23, 2002)

If the new version is stiffer and lighter than the original there was something very wrong with the original design. The reason most carbon cranks end up looking very similar is when confronting the same forces, using the same materials, the optimal solution should be the same regardless of who is attacking the problem.


----------



## Mackers (Dec 29, 2009)

Not if the problem to be solved is how to extract money from wallets.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

CHARLES M said:


> These will be adjustable for length (each side)


Now there's a selling point!
You could order them at 210mm. When they snap off, send them back in to Zero G, have the jagged ends cut smooth and re-fitted at 175mm and you're riding again.

Sustainable cranks, I like it. I like it a lot. :thumbsup:


----------



## Charlie the Unicorn (Jan 8, 2013)

These out yet?


----------



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

Charlie the Unicorn said:


> These out yet?


They are, with a bit of lead time, 3-5 weeks.


----------



## Juanmoretime (Nov 24, 2001)

Keep in mind fugly or not you can win a free set with a pair of Gravitas SL brakes soon.

Gravitas Cranks Technical |

It will also look better with the aero cover on it but there goes the weight weenie version of it.


----------



## carbonLORD (Aug 2, 2004)

Juanmoretime said:


> Keep in mind fugly or not you can win a free set with a pair of Gravitas SL brakes soon.
> 
> http://caw-designs.com/?page_id=49" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
> 
> It will also look better with the aero cover on it but there goes the weight weenie version of it.


The Aero Cover weighs 2-3 grams.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

carbonLORD said:


> The *Aero Cover* weighs 2-3 grams.


......................:lol:


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Come on now, we all know these cranks are the most aerodynamic thing since Zipp putting dimples on their wheels. It'll save you at least 50 watts over 40 kilometers.


----------



## nhluhr (Sep 9, 2010)

nhluhr said:


> I'd be concerned that the only thing preventing that parallelogram structure from flexing is the relative small surface area bonded between the carbon and aluminum. I'd much prefer some sort of triangulated structure. And maybe it's just me, but the spider looks flimsy.


ahhh yep! These things are now on their third revision since introduction.
Ciamillo Gravitas Cranksets Get Stiffer, Now Come in White

and looky here:


> According to Ciamillo, the original design’s sockets would yield to the force of the tubes and could end up wallowing out a bit over time because there wasn’t as much surface area supporting the carbon as he liked.


. I guess now I get to say "I told you so".


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

Honestly a bit surprised. Previous version did look doubtful, but I expected Ted calculated/thought it out thoroughly to come up with that resulting dimension. It's a really silly mistake that he shouldn't have made.

Nonetheless he's replacing current owner's cranks and paying for shipping, so he's owing up to that mistake. He's losing out on the weight weenie aspect a bit though. Bigger manufacturers have made such mistakes, some not as accommodating to fix them.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

Those comments are gold.

Ciamillio might be a great guy but he could use a little humility. He got called out on a few things there.


----------



## eliottjones (Mar 22, 2008)

*Ciamillo Gravitas 3.0 Carbon Crankset arrived*

Just received my Ciamillo Gravitas 3.0 cranks. They're feathery light and beautifully machined CNC'ed sculpture. And definitely not traditional crankset shapes! Will report back when I have them weighted, mounted, and tested out.


----------



## eliottjones (Mar 22, 2008)

*images were duplicated*

More pics of the Gravitas 3.0 crankset.


----------



## twain (May 18, 2004)

*Awesome!*

What kind of bottom bracket is that?
They look sweet!


----------



## looigi (Nov 24, 2010)

Ludicrous, IMHO.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

looigi said:


> Ludicrous, IMHO.


Agree, someone had to say it.

Total fail from an engineering standpoint but a nice styling exercise.

Consider diameter of tube as a determinant of stiffness. And stress risers galore.


----------



## Duane Behrens (Nov 8, 2013)

looigi said:


> Ludicrous, IMHO.


That's what they said about the first bicycle with wheels of the same diameter. 

Give it a chance, see how it performs competitively. Don't dismiss it just because you can't afford it.


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

Duane Behrens said:


> Give it a chance, see how it performs competitively. Don't dismiss it just because you can't afford it.


Yah, right.


----------



## Charlie the Unicorn (Jan 8, 2013)

The main issue w/ Ciamillo is he seems to sell his product before it's been properly tested. Then the issue start (and there have been issues) and then people paid all this money and can't use the product until it's fixed. If you can stomach that, go for it. Other advice coming from the WW's forum seems to be to purchase his stuff through an authorized dealer in case anythng does go wrong. They seem to have more success in getting things repaired replaced. One only needs to do a little research on the WW's forum.

As far as the cranks-
from a weight standpoint, my current cranks are lighter and less expensive than the Ciamillo cranks. I can also get replacement parts w/ little to no wait (other than shipping and a phone call). Ciamillo cranks are probably stiffer, but I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I purchased my current crankset at the time the Ciamillo's were in "pre-production". I got mine mid-December of that year and have been using them since. The Ciamillo cranks came out sometime that spring and I'm not sure how many had issues, but there were issues.

I'm glad I went w/ my current crankset. If I was going to pay more for a crankset, I'd be saving for a THM Clavicula.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

Duane Behrens said:


> Don't dismiss it just because you can't afford it.


Instead of making ad hominem attacks try discussing the product. And there is a fair bit of end user testing for your perusal on WW.

Reading Ciamillo's attempts to respond to serious engineering questions is painful. He seems sincere but is out of his depth and a lot of what he says is nonsense.

BTW my year end bonus was more than yours.


----------



## Duane Behrens (Nov 8, 2013)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> Instead of making *ad hominem* attacks try discussing the product. And there is a fair bit of end user testing for your perusal on WW. Reading *Ciamillo's attempts to respond to serious engineering questions is painful.* He seems sincere but is *out of his depth *and *a lot of what he says is nonsense.* BTW *my year end bonus was more than yours.*



"Ad hominem:" The practice of avoiding the subject at all costs by attacking the character of your opponent. 

Apologies to "Looigi." I found HIS anonymous attacks against an honest startup company annoying and I said so. Odd, then, that another anonymous poster defended his attacks by labeling my response as "ad hominem."

Eh . . . And this has been the way since these anonymous boards were invented. Which should also tell you a lot. Google "James Guckert" and "Jeff Gannon."


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

^ Have you read the comments in the article on bikerumor? Or on WW? 

You seem more interested in hijacking the thread than discussing the components. 

Welcome to my ignore list.


----------



## shoemakerpom2010 (Apr 25, 2011)

Those things look so battlestar galactica... I sooo want a pair!


----------



## Duane Behrens (Nov 8, 2013)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> ^ Have you read the comments in the article on bikerumor? Or on WW?
> 
> You seem more interested in hijacking the thread than discussing the components.
> 
> Welcome to my ignore list.


Sorry you feel that way. I wasn't trying to hijack anything and if it appeared that way, I apologize for that as well. I simply find the act of denigrating a real person or product anonymously as indicative of a hidden agenda, potentially a cover for all sorts of mischief. At best, it's an unethical form of competition. At worst, it's an act of cowardice. I look forward to reading more about this product and I HAVE, actually, visited the Weight Wienies website. Initial assessments (by real people) were favorable. There have been issues with delivery times, crank length and alignment. Real people who have received the cranks appear to like them very much. Anonymous trolls don't like them at all. See above. IMO.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Duane Behrens said:


> Sorry you feel that way. I wasn't trying to hijack anything and if it appeared that way, I apologize for that as well. I simply find the act of denigrating a real person or product anonymously as indicative of a hidden agenda, potentially a cover for all sorts of mischief. At best, it's an unethical form of competition. At worst, it's an act of cowardice. I look forward to reading more about this product and I HAVE, actually, visited the Weight Wienies website. Initial assessments (by real people) were favorable. There have been issues with delivery times, crank length and alignment. *Real people who have received the cranks appear to like them very much. Anonymous trolls don't like them at all. See above. IMO*.


My interpretation of that is that you feel anyone who writes what you want to read is a real person and anyone who doesn't is an anonymous troll.

How do you figure there is a correlation between someone's likeing somthing, or not, and the probability that they are troll?


----------



## Duane Behrens (Nov 8, 2013)

Jay Strongbow said:


> My interpretation of that is that you feel anyone who writes what you want to read is a real person and anyone who doesn't is an anonymous troll. How do you figure there is a correlation between someone's likeing somthing, or not, and the probability that they are troll?


Not at all. Sorry you misunderstood. 

Posts using goofy names like "boloboffin" or "mubareach" are fine when they have no capacity for harm. Read the 2 examples below:

1. "I disagree with your technique on truing a rear wheel because your third step is out of sequence." - clamchowder

is different than

2. "Malwick wheels SUCK! Three friends of mine died last week riding on them! And the owner of the company never returned my calls. He SUCKS too!!" -clamchowder

See the difference?


----------



## eliottjones (Mar 22, 2008)

PF30 but it has the spindle connection in the middle like Campy. He can make it for all BB types. In fact, the cranks are very customizable, notably in crank arm length and spider BCD that can be changed out from standard to compact.


----------



## jmoryl (Sep 5, 2004)

eliottjones said:


> Just received my Ciamillo Gravitas 3.0 cranks. They're feathery light and beautifully machined CNC'ed sculpture.......


Yes, and CNC bike components have such a great reputation for not breaking....

These cranks appear to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist with traditional crank designs.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

The 3.0's look cool, but Cinelli' summed things up. Right now it's a cool looking product - one of those I'd say that could've been worth it for aesthetic's sake - but perhaps failed to be entirely developed from an engineering standpoint. I only gave it confidence because I thought he tested the first version correctly, actually knowing something beyond the suspect design.

I'd also give Ciamillo the benefit of the doubt regarding honesty, but his failure to stay on top of things when people are throwing him hundreds if not thousands of dollars is ridiculous. People literally need to draw his attention at BikeRumor because e-mail communication gets cut.


----------

