Bah Humbug

So I've been looking at a lot of bikes recently, and it seems like most of them in the sub-$2000 range come with Shimano (or occasionally Rival) componentry, but the crankset and BB usually come from FSA. For example, the Redline Conquest Pro (yes I know that's a CX bike) is Rival for shifters, dérailleurs, and cassette, but FSA for BB and crankset. The Cannondale Synapse Alloy 5 is mostly Shimano 105, but again, FSA for the BB and crankset. The same pattern follows with the Kona Kapu. Why is this one component the one that seems most frequently cheaped-out on?

dstrong 

I suspect many people would not consider FSA to be "cheaped out".

One possible answer is that FSA was first to aggressively market a compact crankset. Shimano finally has compacts in the 105/Ultegra lines (not sure about DA) but as compacts gained popularity, FSA was the place the manufacturers turned for whole bike builds with compacts.

Bah Humbug

Ah, being admittedly-unfamiliar with things I had figured it was a cheapening-out thing, since FSA isn't one of the oft-referred-to "big 3" component manufacturers. It just seemed strange that that one specific piece of the gearing/ shifting componentry was so frequently mismatched from the rest.

intence

Probably since there's significant cost savings. Crank, brakes and wheelset is where I usually see manufacturers cutting costs since the less informed consumer probably won't know. They'll probably look at the name on the downtube, and then the name on the shifters or rear derailleur.

Same goes with brakes and wheels (probably two of the most important components). The average person buying their first bike probably wouldn't know much and doesn't realize that wheels can make a significant difference, so a $2000 may come with a cheap set of wheels and OEM brakes (Specialized, Cannondale, etc.) instead of decent wheels and brakes from the groupset manufacturer.

coasting 

i notice that components not form the big 3 tend to be more expensive. i suppose if they can't shift the volume they compete as boutique high end suppliers

merlinextraligh

Because people tend to look at the Rear derailleur to ascertain what groupset is on the bike. Thus Manufacturers can spec a less expensive crank with little penalty in the marketplace.

acorn_user

They are often a lot cheaper, and people don't realise. E.g. if I put a Sora compact on a frame with 105, people might complain. If I put an FSA Omega or Truvativ Elita or similar, no one notices. Same with brakes. I do consider many of the cranks that are put on complete bikes to be downgrades vs the Shimano crank that would match the shifter/rear mech.

p.s. the rear mech is one of the cheapest parts to "upgrade" e.g. from Sora to Tiagra, but it also makes very little difference.

thirdin77

Very to-the-point, the hierarchy of FSA's or, for that matter, Tektro's (brake) products are lesser-known to people.

I actually did replace my bike's FSA omega 50/39/30 crankset with a Tiagra 50/39/30 crankset and it shifts more smoothly.

Jynx

1. FSA is a downgrade from Shimano/Campagnolo/SRAM cranksets2. They do it because they can save money. Most people say their bike is 105 as long as the shifters and deraillers are 105. If the brakes are crap tektro and the crank is a cheap FSA it is still 105 to them. In reality it is a way to save money for the manufacturer.

jrobe

"I actually did replace my bike's FSA omega 50/39/30 crankset with a Tiagra 50/39/30 crankset and it shifts more smoothly. "


Did you have to change the bottom bracket. My TT bike has a FSA crank that seems kind of cheap. If I replaced it with an Ultegra crank, would I need to change the BB?

thirdin77

Yeah, I had to get a Shimano Hollowtech II bb. I was told that all the Hollowtech II cranksets and bottom brackets were compatible, i.e. you don't have to match a Tiagra crankset with a Tiagra bb. I ended up using a 105 bottom bracket with my Tiagra triple crankset.

I made the change mostly because I got my crankset for about $50 and the bb for about $30 with an employee discount, meant for a build-up that I never did. I decided on a whim to install it on my Divano. Were circumstances different, I may have just left my FSA crank on the bike.

So if I had a 10-speed gruppo with a FSA crankset, would I get a Shimano crank & bb? Yes, but only after shopping and waiting for a killer deal. The difference in shifting quality and fit & finish is not good enough, IMO, to warrant paying $400 for a DA crankset but for a 6600 "new old stock" crankset that's discounted, sure.

lukewall

I think the difference in shift quality has more to do with the rings than the cranks themselves. I have a gossamer compact and the rings that came on it weren't that great. It shifted when i wanted it to, but i'll admit the shifting was a little smoother with the shimano double. But with shimano or fsa k-force rings on the fsa crank, i doubt i'll be able to tell a difference in shift quality between the fsa and shimano cranks.

HarryStoddard

What I want to know is: did you really put an accent ague in derailleur?

bigtea

Component downgrades have become increasingly common, in large part because the manufacturers can claim the best brand without having to supply that entire group. Today I frequently measure another cyclist's investment by his components rather than his frame.