Sram Force 10 speed
- Thread starter zaskar
- Start date
I have SRAM Rival and I love it. The difference between Rival and Force is (1) cosmetic, (2) around 100 grams. This works out to like $6/gram. If this is important to you, maybe you want to drill holes in your water bottles, too. (okay, I'm being snide.... maybe just shave off extra plastic...zaskar said:
)One caveat: the 34/50 compact front is great for many purposes -- for example, there's no chainrub problem on near-crossgears which have been reported for Shimano solutions. However, for racing, I might prefer the 36/50, as the 34/50 doesn't shift as crisply as my 53/39 Dura-Ace 9-speed.
Big strengths: the shifting is intuitivie, the "grip-shift" sprinting mode (grasp the levers) would be great if I needed to shift in a sprint, and the brake levers are extremely comfortable (they're more ergonomic than Shimano or Campy). Rival is, I believe, slightly heavier than Dura-Ace, while Force is slightly lighter (I believe...). Basically a small difference in either case. Force and Rival are functional equivalents.
Red will be a next-generation design, and will be still lighter than Force... you might consider waiting (and saving) for that. Otherwise, for 99% of riders, Rival is the most sensible solution.
Dan
I have the SRAM Force... I've only put about 500 miles into it, but it has performed very well. My previous bike had Ultegra, and Force is definitely a step up from that.
I like it so much that I have been considering putting wing handlebars on my fixie and putting SRAM TT brake levers on it.
I like it so much that I have been considering putting wing handlebars on my fixie and putting SRAM TT brake levers on it.
I love it all, and have come to love the brakes.
Except, I hate SRAM cranksets. They just aren't matching the standards set by Shimano and Campy.
Levers and derailleur feel sublime, though I am using a Shimano cassette which shifts better with SRAM than Shimano.
Except, I hate SRAM cranksets. They just aren't matching the standards set by Shimano and Campy.
Levers and derailleur feel sublime, though I am using a Shimano cassette which shifts better with SRAM than Shimano.
If Force is overpriced, get Rival....
From the SRAM 2008 preliminary data report:
Red: 280 grams
Force: 303 grams
Rival: 340 grams
price difference @ Performance: normal $200, but Force is on sale, so $100 at the moment (although sometimes Rival is on sale, so you can probably do better on the Rival price).
Cost per gram: $2.70 (w/ Force on sale), $5.40 (normal price).
37 grams would have saved me 0.5 seconds up Old La Honda Road, which I last did in 17:47, with Rival.
Dan
From the SRAM 2008 preliminary data report:
Red: 280 grams
Force: 303 grams
Rival: 340 grams
price difference @ Performance: normal $200, but Force is on sale, so $100 at the moment (although sometimes Rival is on sale, so you can probably do better on the Rival price).
Cost per gram: $2.70 (w/ Force on sale), $5.40 (normal price).
37 grams would have saved me 0.5 seconds up Old La Honda Road, which I last did in 17:47, with Rival.
Dan
JTE83 said:
Hate is a pretty strong word to use about something as trivial as a shifter...
I have only used 5 different shifters in my lifetime (SunTour friction shifters, GripShift, Shimano Sora, Ultegra and Force); and the Force is far and away the best of the lot. They may or not be as good as DuraAce or Record; but I like them. After about 20 miles of riding it, I was thoroughly used to the nuances of shifting up and down. And feel free to call me weird, but I like only having one lever for shifiting... It sure beats accidentally braking when shifting to a larger gear as I did on occasion with the Ultegra shifters.
Not the mention the main reason components are getting more "expensive" is because US dollars aren't worth as much, not that prices are actually going up.FreeHueco said:
Run up that Chinese credit card buying weapons, SUV's, and anti-depessants by the truck-load, and there's a price to be paid, one way or another.
Dan
Quality: Dura Ace is finished much better. Functional quality is a matter of personal taste. I like shifting with Record better than I do with Dura Ace or Force, but that's me.
Weight: Force has a slight advantage in weight over Dura Ace, but it's nothing that serves any real benefit. Cost/gram analyses are only useful to people who think that's useful. You might, but I don't.
Test ride a bike with SRAM on it. See what you think.
Weight: Force has a slight advantage in weight over Dura Ace, but it's nothing that serves any real benefit. Cost/gram analyses are only useful to people who think that's useful. You might, but I don't.
Test ride a bike with SRAM on it. See what you think.
Compared to Shimano they pale in comparison to the STW ratio.djconnel said:
They are more expensive than DA, cheaper than record
They look really boring.
They aren't very light.
They aren't a bad crank, but for the price, absolutely nothing about them stands out.
mass without bottom bracket (from Performance):bobbyOCR said:
Campy Record: 643 grams, $699 (no bottom bracket)(
SRAM Force: 665 grams, $380 (price, not mass, w/ bottom bracket)
Dura-Ace: 740 grams, $380 (no bottom bracket)
Current prices -- SRAM is cheaper then either (it includes the bottom bracket), lighter than Dura-Ace, 22 g heavier than Record ($14/gram for that savings).
I don't know where you get your "strength" claims -- please post data.
I have been using the Rival level, which is supposed to function the same as the Force for a little over a week and 200 miles. My past history is with Ultegra. I find the Rival is about equal for the quality of shifting as the Ultegra. Smoothness, sound, accuracy etc. It is a different system where all the shifting is done with one lever. It was very easy getting used to it. Maybe it took about 3 or 4 miles and a dozen shifts. And I'm sure when I get back on my Ultegra bike it will take the same time again. You might like it better you might not. For me I'm indifferent.
. Posting claimed weights from Performance of all places is begging for inaccuracy.djconnel said:
from WW.
Record UT compact 697g.
Dura Ace 172.5 non compact 735g, including BB
SRAM Force 170mm non compact 772g including bb.
These are real not claimed weights. You get a lighter, stiffer (at least its stiffness is the benchmark throughout cranksets. Ultegra and FSA energy ISIS are the only 2 I know of that surpass it) better looking (this is objective) crankset for, if you actually look, cheaper. The Shimano rings are better too.
Record is great but I am quite sure it isn't as stiff and it costs a ****ton.
And please don't quote weights trying to prove a point unless they are from somewhere like weightweenies. Claimed weights count for very little.
Apparently..... the Performance claim for SRAM Force differs even from the SRAM documentation (for 2008: 840-780-765 Rival-Force-Red, w/ BB). Shimano claims 740 for Dura-Ace, w/ BB. These numbers are consistent with the WW measurements.bobbyOCR said:
Certainly from Performance, obviously...
Claimed group mass, from SRAM 2008: 2239, 2123, 1965 Rival-Force-Red. Savings: 0-116-274 relative to Rival. -116, 0, 158 relative to Force, -274, -158, 0 relative to Red, assuming 50 g saved on the Red cassette relative to Force.
Dan
Pretty much everyone who has issue with the SRAM cranks (especially Rival) primarily has an issue with the appearance. They are ugly, plain cranks--especially the plain silver Rival cranks with the champagne-colored rings. SRAM does appear to be using Shimano-style chainrings next year--at least for RED.
I definitely think the best thing going for SRAM is the ergonomics of the brake hoods. Downshifting is really fast and easy, too. Then need to work on upshifts--especially in the front (maybe 2008 Force/Rival will see some benefits too.. not just Red).
The other gripe I have is Shimano10 compatibility of their cassette--I am using Ultegra cassette because the SRAM wont work with my Fulcrum wheels and aluminum body--some Fulcrum, Campy, Shimano and Ritchey wheels will have this issue with SRAM cassettes.
Whoever said SRAM is driving prices up is just biased--and maybe scared of what impact another competitor will have on Campy. After all, Trek is already including SRAM on some bikes--even though they refused to spec Campy parts. If you don't think SRAM is a good value, look at the lighter weight of Rival compared to Shimano's new Ultegra SL that costs hundreds more. Actually, I do think the finish quality on Rival is more like 105, though (Of course, nobody is buying Rival for cosmetic reasons!)... :|
SRAM Force with a Steel/Ti cassette (ie: DuraAce) and lighter crank (ie: K-Force SL) is still cheaper and actually LIGHTER than Record (and for the price of Record, you can easily sub a few parts and have something 200g lighter).
Other than personal preference or trim philosophy, I don't think you'll find many reviews that say Rival or Force performance is any worse than their competitors. I'm very happy with mine overall.
I definitely think the best thing going for SRAM is the ergonomics of the brake hoods. Downshifting is really fast and easy, too. Then need to work on upshifts--especially in the front (maybe 2008 Force/Rival will see some benefits too.. not just Red).
The other gripe I have is Shimano10 compatibility of their cassette--I am using Ultegra cassette because the SRAM wont work with my Fulcrum wheels and aluminum body--some Fulcrum, Campy, Shimano and Ritchey wheels will have this issue with SRAM cassettes.
Whoever said SRAM is driving prices up is just biased--and maybe scared of what impact another competitor will have on Campy. After all, Trek is already including SRAM on some bikes--even though they refused to spec Campy parts. If you don't think SRAM is a good value, look at the lighter weight of Rival compared to Shimano's new Ultegra SL that costs hundreds more. Actually, I do think the finish quality on Rival is more like 105, though (Of course, nobody is buying Rival for cosmetic reasons!)... :|
SRAM Force with a Steel/Ti cassette (ie: DuraAce) and lighter crank (ie: K-Force SL) is still cheaper and actually LIGHTER than Record (and for the price of Record, you can easily sub a few parts and have something 200g lighter).
Other than personal preference or trim philosophy, I don't think you'll find many reviews that say Rival or Force performance is any worse than their competitors. I'm very happy with mine overall.
MarvinK said:
Actually, the problem with SRAM cranks....really Truvative cranks....is the lousy history with Truvativ bearings. Also the finish is poor quality compared to offerings from Shimano and Campy.
MarvinK said:
First, this is wrong. SRAM is likely to impact Campy sales very little. Trek doesn't spec Campy because Trek's big market, the US, is predominantly a Shimano market. You can go into very few shops and see spec bikes with Campy components. Industry people have said, and it has been published several places, that SRAM is competing for Shimano market share.
MarvinK said:
Maybe, but the Record cranks don't have the bearing problems that SRAM/Truvativs do; they look better; and Campy's solution to the integrated BB is far superior. Campy also has a narrower Q factor, something which a significant number of people want. K-Force SL? Well, anything FSA is a step down from Campy and Shimano. FSA QC is poor, and their integrated BB design has been less than reliable. To see that, just read all the comments throughtout the last 1.5 years re: FSA crank arms that won't stay tight or stay attached.
If lighter cranks are a concern there are much better options than SRAM or FSA. There is Zipp, THM, Cannondale SI (if you're on a Cannondale), Storck Powerarms, Extralite, Stronglight,....
Interestingly, Trek's Madone with SRAM isn't using the SRAM crank, but rather Bontager:alienator said:
http://www2.trekbikes.com/madone/images/madone_line_up/large/madone55pro.jpg
Clearly they don't view the SRAM crank as of sufficienly selling power to justify the (to them) added cost.
Dan
P.S. I don't recall that the SRAM bottom bracket did significantly worse than Shimano in the VeloNews test, although I believe Campy was better than each. Does anyone have any more recent data? I haven't seen anything.
