Sunday, June 10, 2018

Shimano Dura-Ace RT900 vs XTR RT99 Centrelock Brake Rotors

Recently I changed the disc brake rotors on the Canyon Endurace, so I had the chance to compare the stock rotors and the new rotors.

The Canyon Endurace CF SLX Disc 8.0 Di2 came stock with Shimano RT99 Ice-Tech rotors, which is the top of the line XTR-grade disc brake rotors. It is not often that a stock bike comes with such good brake rotors. Nevertheless, since I am changing the entire groupset to Dura-Ace R9100/R9170, I wanted to make the groupset complete by also changing to the new Dura-Ace brake rotors.

With this, I can compare the XTR brake rotor with the Dura-Ace brake rotor to see how similar or different they are. More details on the Dura-Ace RT900 brake rotors can be found at this link.

Dura-Ace RT900 brake rotors. Main difference with the RT99 rotors is the new appearance!

Ice-Tech Freeza rotors, which has aluminium cooling fins to help dissipate heat from hard or sustained braking.

The "S" refers to the size of the rotor, which means a diameter of 160mm in this case.  

This is the RT99 rotor, which does not have the large black surface area found on the RT900 rotors. However, this RT99 rotor has the wavy pattern which looks like cooling grilles, but is less aerodynamic than the design of the RT900 rotor.

RT99 160mm rotor weighs 115 grams. It has a more aggressive appearance that is more suited for mountain bikes.

The RT99 rotors come with a black anodised aluminium lockring which weighs just 8 grams.

Dura-Ace RT900 brake rotors weigh slightly more, at 118 grams. The weight difference is due to more material used for the larger black fins.

The lockring looks similar, but in silver colour instead.

Although the weighing scale says 7 grams for the lockring, I think it is just due to normal error due to the low weight. The design looks the same as the black lockring, so the weight should be the same.

From this quick comparison, we can see that the Dura-Ace RT900 rotors weigh just slightly more than the XTR RT99 rotors, mainly due to the larger surface area. The biggest difference is definitely the appearance, where the new RT900 design is radical and maybe even controversial. I am a fan of the new RT900 design, as it is more suited to road bikes as compared to the aggressive design of the RT99 rotors.

Wednesday, June 6, 2018

Shimano Dura-Ace 9000 vs R9100: Crankset

With the new Dura-Ace R9100 crankset, it retains the iconic 4 arm design that was first introduced in Dura-Ace 9000. When the 4 arm design was first introduced in 2013, I did not really like it as I still preferred the 5 arm design. However, over these few years the design has become much more common, even in other brands such as FSA or Campagnolo. I have now gotten used to seeing this design and it now looks fine.

On the Canyon Endurace, I have decided to change the groupset from Ultegra 6870 hydraulic Di2 to the latest Dura-Ace R9170 hydraulic Di2 groupset. With that, all the components will be changed, in order to maintain a full Dura-Ace groupset.

As highlighted in another post, the new Dura-Ace R9100 has some distinctive features that is new. However, it is mostly similar to the previous Dura-Ace 9000 crankset. Let's take a closer look and make a comparison between these two cranksets.

Dura-Ace 9000 crankset, with the silver and black anodized series colour.

New Dura-Ace R9100 crankset is mostly black, fading out to grey at the edges of the chainring.

Dura-Ace 9000 chainring is 50/34T, with a silver outer ring ending in the silver coloured teeth.

New chainring is light grey in colour, ending with the teeth that is also grey in colour. The colour on the teeth will quickly wear off and reveal the silver material colour once it is used.

Inner chainring on 9000 crankset is quite ordinary, and the outer chainring also does not have many shifting ramps even though the shifting performance is good.

Inner chainring on new R9100 crankset looks very similar to the 9000 chainring

Previous generation 9000 right crank arm (170mm) is 306 grams

New R9100 right crankarm (165mm) is slightly lighter at 303 grams. It is much chunkier but also slightly shorter in length.

Comparing the chainrings side by side. Both are 50/34T chainrings.

Slightly different positioning of the shifting ramps and pins

9000 series Hollowglide 50T outer chainring is 102 grams

New R9100 series Hollowglide 50T outer chainring is 100 grams

I wondered if the old chainring can fit onto the new crankarm, but found that it will not fit due to the different 4 arm profile. Rather interesting appearance though.

Old crankarm has sharper edges at the back of the crankarm

New crankarm has chamfering at the back of the crankarm to minimize any sharp edges

9000 series left crankarm (170mm) is 176 grams inclusive of the crank arm fixing bolt

New R9100 series left crankarm weighs 175 grams, almost the same even though it is slightly shorter.

Right side crankarm plus chainrings on the 9000 series weighs 440 grams

New R9100 setup is slightly lighter at 434 grams

Full Dura-Ace 9000 crankset (50/34T, 170mm length) is 615 grams

New Dura-Ace R9100 crankset (50/34T, 165mm length) is 610 grams

The new crankset is very slightly lighter in weight, probably due to the shorter 165mm length. However, the stiffness is reportedly improved on the right side due to the chunky 4 arm design that minimizes any flex. For me, I will not be able to produce that much power to induce any flex, so it probably does not make a difference to me.

In summary, the R9100 crankset is more of an incremental improvement on the already excellent 9000 crankset. With the stiffer right crankarm, the stiffness is improved while the weight is maintained. All other aspects are mostly unchanged as far as I can see. The new all black colour should be able to better match most bike frames, as compared to the 9000 series colour which did not match some bike frames in terms of colour.

Saturday, June 2, 2018

Quad Lock Phone Mount - Galaxy S8 Bike Kit

When I go on bike rides, my mobile phone is usually mounted onto the bike. If I put the phone into my pockets, I always worry that it will drop out during cycling. The alternative is to place the phone into my backpack, but I don't always use a backpack, and I might miss important calls or messages as I can't hear my phone when it is in the backpack.

In order to protect the phone from rain, the phone is always placed inside a Topeak Smartphone Drybag, which is sealed and is rainproof. It has worked well for me for many years.

One downside of this is that if I need to operate the screen on the phone, it is difficult to use it properly through the transparent plastic cover. Also, if I want to take a quick picture, it is also troublesome to remove the phone from the pouch before I can take a picture.

Recently I came across this new mounting from Quad Lock. I think it has been available for a few years already, but I have not come across it before. The feature that interested me is the mounting method. It is similar to how a Garmin is mounted, just twist and it is locked in place!

After testing it with my friend's Quad Lock sample, I was sold on the idea of using this mounting kit. Let's take a closer look at this.

Quad Lock bike kit for Samsung Galaxy S8 phone. It has a phone casing that is specific to your phone model. In this case it is the S8.

It comes with a phone casing that you attach to your phone. Your phone will now be compatible to the mount.

The bike mount can be fixed to many places, using either the rubber bands or cable ties. In this case, it is mounted to the stem.

It is advertised to be super secure, as it has an additional spring latch, on top of the usual Garmin-type twist lock design. Once your phone has this Quad Lock casing, you can also attach it to other Quad Lock mounts.

This is the hard rubber casing that you attach to your phone

Quad Lock mounting profile at the back of the casing

Quad Lock mount, comes with rubber bands and cable ties for mounting.

4 tabs which is used to lock the phone casing to the mount

When you push down on the phone casing, the blue part (which is spring loaded) will move down, allowing you to twist the casing into place.

Before the 4 black tabs of the mount is engaged with the phone casing...

...after twisting the casing into place, the blue part will lock into place and prevent the casing from twisting free!

It is practically impossible to remove the phone accidentally, as you need to push down the blue part, while simultaneously twisting and lifting the casing off the mount. Unless you have big hands, you will need both hands to remove the phone from the mount.

Mount weighs 23 grams, including two rubber bands. For weight weenie info.

As mounted on the Java Freccia mini velo. The mount just manages to fit on the 80mm stem. If the stem is any shorter, the mount cannot fit.

The mount protrudes quite a bit, not the best looking mount.

From this view, it seems that the Quad Lock profile on the back of the casing is really slim and does not protrude much.

However, this view shows that the casing itself is really thick, which is meant to hide the depth of the Quad Lock mechanism.

This casing is thicker than normal casings, which means that the phone is a bit bulkier than usual. This extra bulk is not a problem. However, the increased thickness means that inductive charging does not work when this casing is used! This is a downside for me, as I like the inductive charging feature of the S8 phone. When this casing is on the phone, I will have to charge the phone by plugging in a USB cable.

Landscape orientation, probably useful for navigation?

Portrait orientation, for normal usage, and also to avoid interfering with the holding of the drop bar at the top area.

As I plan to use this phone casing and mounting across more than one bike, I also got the additional bike mount to install onto a second bike. This was a free gift which a friend passed to me, which is really nice.

Additional bike mount kit

Phone casing not included in this kit

The other bike that I wanted to mount this Quad Lock kit on was the Canyon Endurace road bike. However, the blue coloured mount does not match the red frame at all! It looks too out of place. Therefore, some DIY work was required, to improve the appearance of the Quad Lock mount on the Canyon Endurace.

First, the mount was disassembled, so that the blue part can be sent for spray painting. This is the post-painting picture, where the blue part (centre) has already been painted black.

Assembling the whole unit back together was a bit tricky, due to the spring force and the alignment required. However, it looks much better and stealthier in this all black edition!

As you can see, the black mount matches the black handlebar and stem well. It still sticks out quite a bit, but I can live with that.

Advantages of Quad Lock:
1) No additional phone pouch required for attaching the phone to your bike.
2) Quad Lock casing is strong and durable for everyday use, even when not attaching it to the bike.
3) Super secure mounting, no worry of it flying off accidentally.
4) Relatively easy to remove the phone from the mount, for taking quick pictures or answering phone calls.
5) Easy to use the phone even when it is mounted, as the phone screen can be touched directly.
6) Versatile mounting options available, you can use Quad Lock for your running armband or in your car if you want.

Disadvantages of Quad Lock:
1) Unable to use inductive charging for your phone as the casing is too thick.
2) Unable to use your favourite phone casing or cover.
3) Bike mount sticks out too much from the stem, which does not look nice.
4) No waterproofing compared to using a sealed phone pouch.

One big downside of using this Quad Lock as compared to a phone pouch is the loss of waterproofing ability. However, as the S8 is already waterproof, this is not a concern for me. If your phone is not waterproof, and you are worried about rain damaging your phone, you have to use a sealed phone pouch.

Depending on your phone usage and whether you use a phone cover, this Quad Lock may or may not work for you. For me, it works well as there are many advantages, which outweighs the disadvantage of not being able to use inductive charging.