# Fsa?



## fishboy316 (Feb 10, 2014)

I am seeing on the bikes in my pricepoint $1500-$2000 most have FSA Gossamer crankset with 105 grouping. What do you folks think of FSA?:confused5:
Thanks


----------



## chudak (Jul 28, 2012)

fishboy316 said:


> I am seeing on the bikes in my pricepoint $1500-$2000 most have FSA Gossamer crankset with 105 grouping. What do you folks think of FSA?:confused5:
> Thanks


My bike has an FSA crank and mostly 105 components. It is what it is. In many cases it is because the frame is BB30 and shimano doesn't make BB30 cranks. In other cases it is to save some money since the FSA cranks are generally a bit cheaper than shimano.

They are probably slightly heavier (< 50g) but they turn the chain. No biggie.


----------



## fishboy316 (Feb 10, 2014)

So not a make or break thing. Cool
Thanks


----------



## mpre53 (Oct 25, 2011)

You'll find bikes in the $3000-$4000 price point range with FSA cranks, too. As chudak said, it's because Shimano doesn't make a BB30 compatible crank.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

I'll break with those above saying FSA's are OE'd on many bikes because Shimano doesn't make a BB30 crankset. 

Their current answer is a press fit design that adapts their Hollowtech ll cranks to OS BB's. This configuration is offered on a few brands/ models. Many see PF30 as superior to BB30. 

Bikes are OE'd with FSA cranks, Tektro brakes , etc. for one reason... cost savings. 

All that said, no, it's not a deal breaker, but FSA's also are not of the quality of some other offerings, Shimano included.


----------



## Nubster (Jul 8, 2009)

My $2700 SRAM Rival equipped bike came with FSA. Granted it's at least hollow core, but FSA just the same. They make ok stuff for the most part. I've read their bearings suck but otherwise, the cranks I've seen are decent. Sure, I'd rather have Rival or Force but those come at a premium price.


----------



## expatbrit (Oct 16, 2013)

Yup. My Ridley has FSA SL-K light cranks, and mostly Ultegra. I'm sure it's cost savings, as PJ states.

Good enough for me, though!


----------



## fishboy316 (Feb 10, 2014)

Thanks guys! Good enough for me also!


----------



## Typetwelve (Jul 1, 2012)

I have a FSA Gassamer/105 rig and outside of the mediocre shifting due to the chainrings, it's given me no troubles. It's a very smooth crank and I've attempted to beat it like it owes me $$. I did swap out to Praxis chainrings and that made a BIG difference, well worth the $175 (or close to that) that I dropped on them.

I'm happy with my crank...I've got 2000+ miles on it so far and no issues in the slightest.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Perhaps not a deal breaker but if given the choice I'd gladly pay extra for a shimano (or a number of other brands) crank instead of an FSA crank. FSA has somehow created an image of a mid to high end component maker by my anacdotal expecience with the brand is that their QC process has some large holes. Kind of the opposite of Tektro mentioned above. The perception of that brand seems to be that they make crap but I think their stuff is actually pretty good especially considering it's cheap.


----------



## bikerector (Oct 31, 2012)

I think shimano makes the best cranks available, I'm not a fan of carbon cranks anymore though either and I think shimano is doing the best stuff with aluminum.

Gossamer cranks are good but heavy. Basically, they do their job. To me, it seems like many of the "cheap" cranks can easily be upgraded by simply buying nicer chainrings. Gossamer + wickwerks = nice crankset for cross. Nothing magical about the cranks but they do seem to work okay. They're all over ebay since they are OE on so many bikes and a lot of people upgrade straight from the floor.

For comparison, I would take a tiagra crank over a gossamer crank, I like the finish better and it seems to equally priced and I think the rings are equally as nice. I don't car for the little ring on the lower shimano cranks but the big ring seems nice. FSA rings are just average and the lower models (vero and such) are poop. They work, but there are many, many better options.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

My 'cross bike came with an FSA crank and Kore cantilever brakes. That was a few years ago.

It currently has, to advantage, an Origin-8 crank with a Shimano and a RaceFace chainring (and Shimano cartridge BB) and Tektro mini-Vs.

Part of that is that the particular FSA crank was the Omega, which comes with a crappy bottom bracket and isn't compatible with anything else due to a weird spindle size. But I don't think their chain rings are very good either.

I don't know that I'd avoid a bike with a FSA crank. The industry has mostly stopped offering complete bikes with a complete group or good everyday wheels. If I'm buying complete, I'm doing it for the same reason the majors don't - cost savings. I think the Gossamer will give you many years of service, though you may not want to choose FSA's rings or bottom bracket as you maintain it.

IIRC, this will be your first road bike?


----------



## expatbrit (Oct 16, 2013)

When I decided I wanted to go to 50/34, I did use Praxis rings, rather than FSA...


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Jay Strongbow said:


> FSA has somehow created an image of a mid to high end component maker by my anacdotal expecience with the brand is that their QC process has some large holes. Kind of the opposite of Tektro mentioned above. *The perception of that brand seems to be that they make crap but I think their stuff is actually pretty good especially considering it's cheap.
> *


I agree, completely. Didn't mean to imply that Tektro quality was on a par with FSA's, but in re-reading that sentence in my post, the implication is there.

If I were doing a "budget" build, I'd opt for Tektro brakes as well. Not an FSA crankset, though. 

Also, it strikes me as odd that a couple of posters make mention of replacing FSA chainrings (at a sizable cost), saying that improved their cranksets performance. For around the same price mentioned, Shimano cranksets are available. 

I think some people aren't aware that there are other options available for their OSBB's.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

My Cannondale rain bike came with Ultegra cassette and derailers, the crank was FSA - I asked the shop to swap the crank for the Ultegra as part of the purchase. The upgrade added around $150 to the price of the bike.


----------



## RaptorTC (Jul 20, 2012)

Love their handlebars.

Their cranksets...not so much. My bike came with a Vero crankset. I understand that's pretty low end, but it bent after just a few months of use. Replaced it with a Tiagra and had no problems afterwards.


----------



## expatbrit (Oct 16, 2013)

I was kinda lazy, as one of the 'I replaced my chainrings' guys. That was easy, and with a BB386 (I think) bottom bracket the conversion hurt my head.

I have the higher end FSA cranks, though, and only replaced the rings to go to 50/34.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

expatbrit said:


> I was kinda lazy, as one of the 'I replaced my chainrings' guys. That was easy, and with a BB386 (I think) bottom bracket the conversion hurt my head.
> 
> I have the higher end FSA cranks, though, and only replaced the rings to go to 50/34.


It's probably a BB86 BB. Or BB90 if it's a Trek. If so, it uses 24mm spindles.. same as Shimano. 

Most convo's re: OSBB's hurt peoples head, so you aren't alone. :wink5:


----------



## davecm203 (Feb 28, 2014)

I have FSA but it is SL-K. Would the chain rings be the same for both? Mine shifts like an absolute charm. If your shifting is sloppy, it might be worth a look to see if the SLK rings would work and see if there is a difference in the profile. If not, then it could be the set up. The FSA work better than the Sora cranks that were on there. (I bought the bike used. I don't think the guy kept his crank torqued because an arm stripped and came lose on a ride. Rather than replace the crank set with something comparable, he cheaped out. The Sora was so heavy. I wanted Ultegra but got a good deal on the FSA.)


----------



## nims (Jul 7, 2009)

I have the FSA Gossamer on my 2013 Cannondale Synapse 5. The crank has been okkish for me, I did have to replace the bearing in the BB after less than 2000 miles and the non-drive crank arm came loose but I wonder if it's due to my weight (went from 275 to 230 since the purchase in July last year could have contributed to the wear). Since the new bearings and crank arm tightening I've had no problem, bike is quiet and shifts well. 

I'm but one case so don't take my experience as a bad sign. Those cranks are on a lot of bikes, bike companies would swap if they were generally super crappy and cause the bike company to get a bad reputation.


----------



## expatbrit (Oct 16, 2013)

PJ352 said:


> It's probably a BB86 BB. Or BB90 if it's a Trek. If so, it uses 24mm spindles.. same as Shimano.
> 
> Most convo's re: OSBB's hurt peoples head, so you aren't alone. :wink5:


Too many standards, and my head is full of non-bike ones.

I'm assuming BB386 EVO. At least based on the labeling on the crankset.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

davecm203 said:


> ... *it could be the set up*. The FSA work better than the Sora cranks that were on there. (I bought the bike used. *I don't think the guy kept his crank torqued *because an arm stripped and came lose on a ride. Rather than replace the crank set with something comparable, he cheaped out. The Sora was so heavy. I wanted Ultegra but got a good deal on the FSA.)


Both setup problems and poor maintenance are separate issues than inherent design flaws, which some FSA's have had. I can set up a DA FD so that it'll shift like crap and a Sora FD to shift near perfect.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

expatbrit said:


> *Too many standards*, and my head is full of non-bike ones.
> 
> I'm assuming BB386 EVO. At least based on the labeling on the crankset.


Seems a contradictory statement, but I agree. 

Can't argue with labeling. You have FSA's standard of a BB30.


----------



## expatbrit (Oct 16, 2013)

PJ352 said:


> Seems a contradictory statement, but I agree.
> 
> Can't argue with labeling. You have FSA's standard of a BB30.


Hah! Yes. My head is full of computer-non- standards, to boot


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

nims said:


> I have the FSA Gossamer on my 2013 Cannondale Synapse 5. The crank has been okkish for me, I did have to replace the bearing in the BB after less than 2000 miles and the non-drive crank arm came loose but I wonder if it's due to my weight (went from 275 to 230 since the purchase in July last year could have contributed to the wear). Since the new bearings and crank arm tightening I've had no problem, bike is quiet and shifts well.
> 
> I'm but one case so don't take my experience as a bad sign. Those cranks are on a lot of bikes, bike companies would swap if they were generally super crappy and cause the bike company to get a bad reputation.


Gossamer's actually have a history of bad bearings and the non-drive side crank arm coming loose. There was a recall awhile back for the crankarms, so your experiences aren't at all unique.

As far as bike companies swapping to something else, there aren't a lot of 'better' choices out there in the same price range.


----------



## davecm203 (Feb 28, 2014)

PJ352 said:


> Both setup problems and poor maintenance are separate issues than inherent design flaws, which some FSA's have had. I can set up a DA FD so that it'll shift like crap and a Sora FD to shift near perfect.


You are 100% correct. I am drugged up on pain meds and not thinking properly. I bought my wife a beginner bike that has full Sora. I actually was having fun on it and was amaized at how well the Sora works. Thanks for the correction.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

davecm203 said:


> You are 100% correct. I am drugged up on pain meds and not thinking properly. I bought my wife a beginner bike that has full Sora. I actually was having fun on it and was amaized at how well the Sora works. Thanks for the correction.


Don't sell yourself short. Your post had merit, and you're right that Sora is heavy. 

I just wanted to point up that function/ performance of most any groupset is largely dependent on installation and tuning. Something folks need to keep in mind on test rides.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

PJ352 said:


> Gossamer's actually have a history of bad bearings and the non-drive side crank arm coming loose. There was a recall awhile back for the crankarms, so your experiences aren't at all unique.
> 
> As far as bike companies swapping to something else, there aren't a lot of 'better' choices out there in the same price range.


This is annoying to me, and I think it's something we the consumers have brought on ourselves. There are a lot of cheap arms for three-piece setups, and Shimano's cartridge bottom brackets are cheap, at the low end, but all that stuff still works fine. We're just not skeptical enough of a cheap outboard setup. The very cheapest bikes are still using three-piece cranks, so I suspect companies are paying more to give us FSA.

My Origin-8 arms are clearly a low-end product. But they fit where they need to fit, they have acceptably flat faces where they need them, and paired with nice rings and a cheap Shimano BB I pulled from my spares drawer, I have a reliable, smooth-pedaling and smooth-shifting set. FSA couldn't do that, and they provided all the parts.

Still like their bars though.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

AndrwSwitch said:


> The very cheapest bikes are still using three-piece cranks, so I suspect companies are paying more to give us FSA.


I think companies are giving us FSA's because they're the cheapest option to use with OSBB's, and there's a big marketing push for that.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

PJ352 said:


> I think companies are giving us FSA's because they're the cheapest option to use with OSBB's, and there's a big marketing push for that.


Agree. The person who's done some homework before buying his or her first good road bike wants outboard bearings on the bike because (rightly or wrongly) they are seen as indicator of a certain level of quality.

Shimano would dearly love to sell boatloads of full groups including the crank to manufacturers to put on their entry-level bikes, but few are biting. Shimano's latest attempt was the 2013 Claris introduction. That group went back to Octalink to circumvent the square taper stigma, but I'm not seeing a whole lot of full Claris bikes out there either.


----------

