# Mix n' match FSA and Shimano chainrings?



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

Minor case of impatience. I've considered the move from my 34 to a 36 tooth ring, on top of that, previous owner of my R700 crank says the 50 tooth ring is at "half-life", so going for a whole set makes sense.

However, I'm tight with the budget, and opting for an FSA ring since Shimano doesn't seem to make a 36t and I'm expecting it to be outrageously-priced regardless. I figured my big rationale to "jumping the gun" and buying one ring (36t first) at a time is that I'm spending the majority of my rides climbing. 

Fair deal? Or wait it out? I'm not really dying for the change, but a bit anxious since well...I'll use it. Will the front shifting be God-awful or something atm?


----------



## backinthesaddle (Nov 22, 2006)

It'll be fine. I'm running a FSA inner 38 with a Thorne 46 outer on my cross bike. Also running a FSA 39 with a Shimano 53 on the roadie. Both shift perfectly.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

backinthesaddle said:


> It'll be fine. I'm running a FSA inner 38 with a Thorne 46 outer on my cross bike. Also running a FSA 39 with a Shimano 53 on the roadie. Both shift perfectly.


Ah, wonderful.


----------



## DaveT (Feb 12, 2004)

The small ring doesn't need all the ramps and pins to shift properly, so most any ring will work satisfactorily in that position. The big ring on the other hand needs those ramps and pins to get the chain on it quickly. There's not too many aftermarket big rings that shift as well as Shimano or SRAM.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

Follow-up: Was eye-ing the FSA Super Chainrings, and read they're only compatible with FSA compact cranks. Is this true?


----------



## DaveT (Feb 12, 2004)

Ventruck said:


> Follow-up: Was eye-ing the FSA Super Chainrings, and read they're only compatible with FSA compact cranks. Is this true?


I don't see how. If they're 110BCD, which is a standard, the rings should be able to be used on most 110BCD crankarms.

I did read on Competitive Cyclist website the the Super chainrings are compatible with only FSA cranksets, but again I wonder if they mis-spoke. All other sources that I could find regarding FSA Super chainring compatibility have references to having to use certain sized chainrings as a set (inner and outer together) which I think means the way the rings are pinned and ramped so they work together to aid shifting. nothing about crank compatibility.

The thing to do in your case it contact FSA directly with your questions.


----------



## backinthesaddle (Nov 22, 2006)

BS! I'm riding 130bcd Super road rings on my D/A crank and have had ZERO issues.


----------



## AlanE (Jan 22, 2002)

FWIW, I just installed RaceFace 53 & 39 on my Ultegra crank and everything works fine.

On a related issue, it seems to me that the design on the chainring nut is really really bad. Wouldn't it have made sense to make the nut hex shaped rather than round so you don't need another tool to prevent it from turning? Seems like a no-brainer to me.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

DaveT said:


> The small ring doesn't need all the ramps and pins to shift properly, so most any ring will work satisfactorily in that position. The big ring on the other hand needs those ramps and pins to get the chain on it quickly. There's not too many aftermarket big rings that shift as well as Shimano or SRAM.


Well said.

Thing is though, I sometimes see chainrings designated as "50t for 36" or somesuch, which seems to indicate that some makers are trying to match chainrings as sets. BUT, if the inner ring has no ramps or pins (which it wouldn't seem to need on a double crankset, since the chain is never trying to climb UP onto it), then there should be no 'matching' needed, except perhaps on a triple crank.

Sigh. Why do the component makers always try to make everything painfully confusing?  
.


----------

