Chainsets XT or SLX?

Is there any point buying XT over SLX? I have had various SLX components and they have all been as good as the XT they have replaced and practically the same weight. At £90 against £130 – almost- is an XT chainset worth the extra? Are the bearings the same, are the chainrings still made of butter?

bearings are the same, and i think the weight difference is slx have a steel granny, if you put an ally xt one on when it wears theres nowt in it,
i think

one is industrial grey, the other silver. Not sure if any other differences

If you want 175mm Noahs have XT's for £112.38 delivered

XT usa much more bling and that's what counts 8)

SLX looks a bit more downhilly, XT more XC? IIRC SLX is meant to be about same quality but a bit more rugged and therefore a bit heavier

Just started using slx after no end of grief from race face deus. I got mine from Ribble for £55 which to me is a bargain but you dont get the BB though. Shifting is spot on so no complaints. As for weight, go for a dump before you go riding. As for the 'bling' aspect, if you can afford it then why not.

I bought an SLX as it was the only one my LBS (took some convincing at first) had in stock and its ace, can't justify paying the extra for XT now.

SLX all the way unless you're looking to save weight for racing.

I know of one very good shop that builds its own bikes – told me they tend to use SLX now rather than XT as it's such good value and great quality.

XT looks nicer though …

i price mached ribble at evans for the slxp and got the bottom bracket too. It came today and they look sweet. For 55 pound you cant go wrong.

XT looks nicer though …

Most of the bits yes….I still think the SLX chainset looks betterer tho.

SLX cranks look nicer to my eye, for sure.

There's about 40g weight difference (XT weighs less of course) which is naff all.

Both have a composite middle ring which lasts a lot longer.

There's pretty much nothing in the stiffness.

Unless the 40g is really worth another £40 or so to you, SLX are significantly better value. That's not to say they're better though of course! 😉

…oh and the fact i got a SLX chainset and BB from ribble for £74 is also quite nice 😀

With SLX:

With XT:

I went for XT after my SLX chainset didn't last very long and because XT now has a carbon/steel middle ring (used to be weak alloy making SLX a better choice)

I just like the finish of XT more and it's a wee bit lighter.

I ended up with the SLX. Just took delivery today and it looks fine.

Time to take the old XTR one off and decide what to do with it.

Which XTR is it? What is wrong with it?

I've got SLX on my FS and it's rather good, had it since they first came out.

I prefer the look of it over XT too.

I think SLX looks more like a low rent crankset and nothing like XTR apart from being two tone.

XT just has a nicer design IMO:

I can't see why anyone would say XT is "better" just because they have SLX. How is it better? It's heavier and no stiffer, more durable or anything.

I've not long replaced an XT octalink with a SLX HT2, and the SLX does the job just as well as the XT.
Couldn't justify the extra cost of XT cranks over SLX now.

From 10 feet away you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference between my XTR and SLX. Except that you can still read SLX on one whereas the XTR logo has obviously worn off. The actual crankset looks very similiar but the SLX big ring does look a bit nasty, lucky I take those off really. XTR has a nicer looking finish but ironically it's not as durable.

XT is still a lovely chainset mind but if weight is your thing, you could spend that £40 better elsewhere most likely. SLX crank is one of the best bits of bike kit out there just now IMO.

my SLX chainset didn't last very long

What went wrong with it?

I can't see why anyone would say XT is "better" just because they have SLX. How is it better? It's heavier and no stiffer, more durable or anything.

I assume you mean SLX instead of XT there. IIRC Shimano claimed the SLX cranks were stiffer at the time of release. Also the double version has steel pedal inserts, but looks are subjective. You could probably argue that the XT is a (very slightly) better chainset, but VFM wise SLX poos all over XT IMO. I don't own either.

What went wrong with it?

Middle and outer chainrings wore very quickly, BB died.

Poppa – I did mean that but the VFM wise, why does anyone get an XTR chainset? It's not a whole heap lighter but it's three times the cost. I also got XT SPDs over M540s – only a wee bit lighter and more expensive but hey ho, that's the biking industry for you.

VFM aside, the XT is lighter, has a steel and carbon middle chainring and IMO, is stiffer – just look at the way the crankarm sits more snugly in the spider.

VFM aside, the XT is lighter, has a steel and carbon middle chainring and IMO, is stiffer

I know i'm being pedantic now, but I can't resist. The SLX also has a steel/carbon middle ring (on the triple), and a steel inner ring. I suspect stiffness is a bit of a grey area, after all Shimano claim the SLX is stiffer than the XT.

XT SPDs over M540s – only a wee bit lighter and more expensive

TBH I'd take exception to that, they're the same pedals as far as i can work out (I have both), apart from the colours being reversed they are the same inside and out.

Which XTR is it? What is wrong with it?

Mr P

It is an Octalink HT1 – I need to replace the BB and chainrings. The BB will cost me £55 and the rings maybe 25 to 40 each. The SLX comes in cheaper and I'll have a choice of bearings when the Shimano ones die.

I can't seem to get much life out of the BBs. If I am lucky I'll get 1,000 miles out of one but in reality I'm changing BB twice a year.

poppa – that "fact" is bandied around everywhere but I challenge to find any evidence of it – anywhere.

Bigyinn – again you are talking cr4p:

XT SPDs have better quality bearings, are made of higher grade material and have a better lubricant seal.

and IMO, is stiffer – just look at the way the crankarm sits more snugly in the spider.

Unlike this 'fact' eh? 😉

Well, it apparently came from Shimano so presumably holds much or as little weight as anything Shimano say.

'Shimano claim the SLX cranks are 100 per cent stronger than XT, and from the abuse they’ve handled since we’ve had them, we’re ?rm believers. They feel as stiff as most downhill cranks, and ramps and pins on the rings give slick and quick shifts.'

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/components/cranksets/product/slx-crankset-09-34107

From a review over a year ago – the XT chainset has since been heavily revised.

But what would I know, I've only run both on the same bike after all…

The deciding factor for me is the cost of replacement chainrings. Again, for VFM SLX beats XT considering we're only talking about 50 grammes difference.

Buy the XT if you either have spare cash to blow or want the name or prefer the looks. Don't try and pretend that it can be justified logically. Buy the SLX and spend the difference in price on other components which will save more weight.

Cost of replacement rings is irrelevant BTW – you can mix and match as you choose when they wear out.

The SLX arms (no rings/BB) have been found to be lighter than the XT, although manufacturing differences could make it so that a set of lighter XTs could probably be found. The main weight difference between SLX and XT is in the rings.

The supplied BB cups are identical (bearings and seals) for SLX and XT.

Although the SLX uses a composite middle ring, it's not the same as the XT and is heavier. The big ring is simply not comparable. I have pictures of the weight differences between the rings, just not at this computer. All three rings use entirely different materials and the two larger rings have a different design.

I suspect that most riders wouldn't tell the difference in ride quality between the two sets, so could just make their decision based on aesthetics.

From a review over a year ago – the XT chainset has since been heavily revised.

But what would I know, I've only run both on the same bike after all…

Well, the new XT has the same crank arms as the old XT so I don't think the age of the review means anything. But in any case you have the experience of riding them, not me.

If its for general riding SLX, if racing XT or XTR. As for the XT / M540 pedals, I run both and notice no difference, also dont think there is a weight difference in them

If its for general riding SLX, if racing XT or XTR

This is often said but how is plus or minus 40g going to impact on your racing ability? One muddy section and it won't matter if you are running XTR or Deore (from a weight POV).

Given that most of us are going to be also rans in any race we enter, weight is largely irrelevant. If there were other aspects such as poor shifting, fragile chainrings etc then I'd be inclined to agree. If, everything else being equal) there is little operational/functional difference between the two then it all becomes subjective… surely.

When I was a few years younger than I am now (ahem) I had my eyes well and truly opened when I went out for a ride with a guy who had been offered a ride with Cannondale Volvo (GB). I had my blinged out XC bike, XT, XTR all over it, sexy wheels, super lightweight tyres the works. It was a bit muddy and sloppy but nothing too bad. He turned upp on a £150 Univega with slicks on it. It was his uncle's bike and he had just come back for the weekend (with his riding kit, shoes and a pair of pedals.) Anyway, my race head buddies and I went out full of confidence htat we would make a good show up against the elite rider.

Sadly, we didn't see much of him, had it been dusty we would have been eating his dust all day. He would wait at the end of the singletrack while we were red lining it, then cruise along the fire roads at (our) TT pace. Anyway, after a few hours of torture he got distracted by a pit full of jump bikes. He then proceeded to show them up too. (Don't get me wrong, he wasn't showing off – he was just several classes above everyone else… and a really nice bloke with it.)

My point being, he showed me quite graphically, that it is the man/woman on the bike not the bike or its equipment.

If we want XT or XTR or whatever, that is up to us but ,functionally, why pay more for the bling bits?

What's happened here? This is usually a weight weenies website.

50g may only be 50g but it's still useful when getting a light but robust bike. And silver finishes are smoother and more aerodynamic so therefore faster…;-)

XT SPDs are very slightly lighter than 540s – but it's only a few grams. They also happen to be black which matches my frame…

IMO, is stiffer – just look at the way the crankarm sits more snugly in the spider.

As well, that's me convinced. How much stiffer do you reckon it is, just by looking at the increased snugness, 12% ?

How much stiffer do you reckon it is, just by looking at the increased snugness, 12% ?

You'd need to know the snugness meausurement, but snugness will typically increase stiffness by a ratio of around 1:1.22 within a 17cm (approx.) radius of the axle; so a 10% increase/difference in snugness will translate to a an increase of around 11.22%. I wouldn't like to say what the figures would be for a 175mm crank.