Currently running a Shimano Ultegra 6800 crankset with 50/34 rings. Run an 11/32 cassette. Looking to get to a 1:1 ratio for help on steeper climbs. Intrigued with the Absolute Black Premium Gravel Chainrings in 48/32 configuration as they can mount right up to my Ultegra 6800 crankset. I realize that there are also other crankiest options out there that can do the same thing even in direct mount fashion. Don't want to swap out the Ultegra crankset though as I have a Stages power meter and don't want to have to address a new power meter option.
For more information, this is on a 2017 Salsa Warbird Carbon with a 11x142 rear end.
Has anyone tried out these chainrings? What are your thoughts on them? Any chainline issues? I believe that using them moves the chainrings 2.5mm closer to the frame.
You might also consider an 11-42 cassette and get the wolftooth road link to allow your current RD to work with that. I have that setup with my 105 group and it works great.
skr29er wrote:Currently running a Shimano Ultegra 6800 crankset with 50/34 rings. Run an 11/32 cassette. Looking to get to a 1:1 ratio for help on steeper climbs. Intrigued with the Absolute Black Premium Gravel Chainrings in 48/32 configuration as they can mount right up to my Ultegra 6800 crankset. I realize that there are also other crankset options out there that can do the same thing even in direct mount fashion. Don't want to swap out the Ultegra crankset though as I have a Stages power meter and don't want to have to address a new power meter option.
For more information, this is on a 2017 Salsa Warbird Carbon with a 11x142 rear end.
Has anyone tried out these chainrings? What are your thoughts on them? Any chainline issues? I believe that using them moves the chainrings 2.5mm closer to the frame.
I'm also interested in running smaller chainrings on my Ultegra crankset. Unfortunately, I believe that these are oval shaped rather than round. If you like oval rings, these may be a good choice; but for me it's a show stopper.
bobknh wrote:I'm also interested in running smaller chainrings on my Ultegra crankset. Unfortunately, I believe that these are oval shaped rather than round. If you like oval rings, these may be a good choice; but for me it's a show stopper.
\n
\nSame boat. I wonder if Shimano has some tough patents on 4-hole 110 round rings?
That is a LOT of money to make your lowest gear 5% lower than it currently is. Most shifts on an 11-32 cassette are differences of 10-15% per shift. The 'difference' you would feel is roughly equivalent to half or a third of a shift lower...so barely any difference.
*Specific to 11 speed* If you really need lower gearing, you might want to look at bigger cassettes instead of new chainrings. 11-34 works with just about any road rear derailleur even if the specs don't line up. You could try the 11-34 Ultegra (or soon to be available 105 version) for way less money to get that 1:1 if that's the ratio you are set on. The SRAM 11-36 (with a Roadlink - assuming your rear derailleur is also Shimano) will work with a 50/34 front crank and Shimano GS rear derailleur even though it's right at the edge of their chain capacity spec. There's no room for error on chain sizing that setup.
If you want those Absolute Black rings, I can't see anything that would move the chainline over. Usually the crank dictates chainline.
I am running an ultegra setup with 6800 crank and 6870 long cage rear derailleur. I run a sram 11-36 cogset, no wolf tooth, shifts perfectly. I recently added absolute black 46-30 oval rings. I love this set up for steep gravel hills. The rings do indeed sit a bit inward from standard rings, which improves performance with the larger cogs. It took me perhaps 30 minutes of pedaling to feel totally comfortable with the oval rings. I notice a real difference when climbing - pedaling seems easier. What I really like is that I can do most of my riding in the big ring, only using the small ring as a real granny gear.
