Quarq D2 cranks = rebranded Red cranks?

Everyone, please help me with the first-worldiest of first world problems. I recently put in an order for a 3T Strada, and my LBS is trying to get all the parts now. It comes with a Force eTap groupset.

My LBS told me they could hook me up with a Quarq D2 crank instead at not extra charge. They claim it is a rebranded Red crank — which is 15 % lighter and makes me 25 % faster. :laughing:

Is that true?

And are there any limitations that I should be aware of in terms of chain rings and bolt standards?

Both will get a Quarq Dzero power meter, so the power meter is identical save for the mount and the aesthetics.

The Quarq crank arms certainly look the same as the SRAM Red cranks so I would happily bet they’re the same.

SRAM owns Quarq, so the likelihood is high.

D1 = rebranded red
D2 = rebranded force

1 Like

Makes sense based on the photos I have seen. I guess I’ll pick Force then to have a matching color scheme.

This topic came up on another forum I use:

I looked in to it myself and ended up buying the red cranks because I couldn’t find the red-spec quarq versions any cheaper than red. FWIW, the crank is a worthwhile upgrade if weight is important to you but the rest of the components are very similar in weight between force and red axs.

1 Like

The link is perfect, thanks a bunch. :+1:

1 Like

Sram has/had a few levels of Carbon cranks. Most are carbon wrapped over Aluminium with more layers or less layers of carbon. In any case, yeah basically the Quarq and SRAM units are exactly the same functionally. I’d go with the crank with the better looking graphics.

1 Like

Out of curiosity, what is the advantage of wrapping an aluminum crank in carbon?

PS I “solved” the problem in the first-worldiest way possible: my LBS informed me that upgrading to a genuine Red eTap AXS 1x crank would cost me only $130. So I went for the upgrade. :smiley:

Edit: I spoke too soon. If I upgrade, I’ll have to wait until June. Bummer.

CF is bad at being precisely machined, AL is good at that.
CF looks like CF.
AL doesn’t look like CF
People pay more for CF

High end AL and low end CF are about the same weight and strength if you’re making something 3 dimensionally strong. The CF part is hard to mfg and takes up more physical space (see stems at understand up to here). CF is lighter when you’re making something strong in 1D or 2D. They make the core out of AL with all the tight tolerance stuff and to set the base 3D strength. They then stiffen the directions that need stiffening with carbon. There aren’t too many layers of carbon, so they don’t need to over-build it to account for manufacturing issues with full carbon items.

Having said that… a Rotor 3D is all AL about the same weight and price. It’s more compact, durable, and stiffer. It’s harder to mass produce though because of the machining.

I was afraid you were going to say that. :disappointed:

My previous LBS sold lots of them. I test rode a BMC with a Rotor crank and it felt very good. Despite the oval chain rings, shifting was crisp and it felt stiff.

Saw this today, which is a bit different than I thought. It seems all the Exogram ones (the thicker, fat arms) are hollow or have a foam core. Otherwise they are the older thin arms on an AL skeleton (like i described. - https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sram-2x10-x0-crankarm-cutaway03.jpg

Ah, ok, that makes sense: spindle and the eyelet where the pedal interfaces are aluminum and the actual arm is carbon. But it is not a carbon beauty-wrap around an aluminum crankarm.