Posted on November 1, 2022 by Zach Overholt

What are all of the reasons for not running carbon cranks on a mountain bike? Heel scuffs? Damage from crashing? Broken pedal inserts? Race Face is tackling all of those concerns head-on with their new Era carbon crankset.

One of the most visible changes to the new Era crankset is the addition of a stainless steel heel scuff protection plate. Heel scuffs on crank arms have been a fact of life for many cyclists – even on aluminum crank arms. Some try to preempt the damage with protective stickers on the crank arms, but Race Face is taking the protective concept to the extreme.

Like you’d see on many carbon frames, the carbon Era crank arms have integrated stainless steel plates to protect the carbon – no additional stickers required. These plates should arguably be more durable than most crank materials, and the plates wrap around the sides of the crank arms for comprehensive protection.

Heel scuffs are one thing, but breaking the pedal insert out of a carbon crank is another story entirely. In an effort to make the Era their “strongest, stiffest, and most durable carbon crank ever,” Race FAce claims to have redesigned the pedal insert and bonded them directly to the carbon layup.

Additional protection is then offered through a new pedal boot which slips onto the end of the crankarm.

The pedal boots are available in 8 colors while the crank arms themselves are offered in 7 different color options to mix and match to suit your build.

Crank arms are offered in 165, 170, and 175mm lengths and a 176mm Q-factor when used with a 136mm spindle.

The preload adjuster has been slightly redesigned.

One of the best features of Race Face cranks has always been the built-in versatility of the CINCH system. Choose your crank arm, your spindle, and your chainring. Then still have the option of switching things up in the future. With the same crank arm and chainring interface as prior CINCH cranks, the new ERA crank arms should be backwards compatible.

CINCH cranks use a threaded lockring to clamp down on the chainring, making for quick swaps.

Like previous CINCH cranksets, the spindle is 30mm in diameter and made from aluminum.

When it comes to chainline, Race Face gives two options – 52mm with a DM chainring, or 55mm with a DMW chainring.

As shown above, the 170mm arms and a 136mm spindle weigh in at 415g. A 32t Shimano 12-speed chainring adds 79g, and the crank boots check in at 19g. Without the bottom bracket you’re looking at 513g total. The standard 68/73mm BSA threaded bottom bracket with all the spacers above weighs in at 91g.

That makes the Era a bit heavier than the Next SL G5 cranks, but it’s really more appropriate to compare these to the Rally R cranks which these seem to replace. The Era is built for burlier riding in mind, but is still light enough for XC builds for riders who prize absolute durability over the lightest weight possible.

Some of the biggest news here might be the new Lifetime Warranty policy that includes crashing. You have to be actually riding your bike while crashing for it to count though – the warranty will not cover crashing your bike into your garage while on top of your vehicle. But the new Lifetime Warranty will cover most of their hard goods including Wheels, Pedals, Handlebars, Stems, Cranks, Chainrings and Static (non-actuated) seat posts.

For more details on the warranty or to start a claim, check out this link.

Sold as crankarms and a spindle only, the Era crank is priced at $499. The cranks are currently available in all three crank lengths, but only in black with the other colors available in the future. Chainrings, colored pedal boots, and bottom brackets are all sold separately, but the cranks do include black crank boots and stainless pedal washers in the box.

Zach Overholt is the Editor in Chief of Bikerumor. He has been writing about what’s new in the bicycle world for 12+ years. Prior to that, Zach spent many years in the back of a bicycle shop building and repairing nearly every type of bike, while figuring out how to (occasionally) ride them.

Based in Ohio, Zach is now slowly introducing a new generation to cycling and still trying to figure out how to fit the most rides into a busy schedule as a new dad.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

I’m guessing these are a spiritual successor to the SixC cranks of yore.

Steel heel guards?! 100% unnecessary IMHO. Set your shoes/cleats up correctly and you won’t rub – problem solved. If you are rubbing your cranks, you are wasting watts. This ‘feature’ is the crankset equivalent of a spoke protector on your cassettes.

Must be nice to have small feet. Or ride road bikes. With how dynamic mountain biking is and how large my feet are they will rub from time to time regardless of proper setup.

Small (or large) feet can be set up properly with cleats not to rub, or if you prefer flats, be sure to run pedals with a wider axle. Occasional rub? Sure… but does an occasional rub warrant a scuff plate? Overkill.

Possibly one of the worst hot takes in a sea of terrible hot takes typical of the Bikerumor commentariat.

If you have feet over about size 42 or 43, you’re going to scuff your cranks occasionally, whether you ride clippess or flat. It’s called finessing the bike. Try it sometime.

Congratulations on your snarky response! Occasional rubbing does NOT require a scuff plate. Occasional does not wear away carbon. Big feet? Set your cleats up wider or get pedals with a wider axle. And try ‘occasionally’ being nicer to somebody who points out an observation and an opinion of over-correction for ill bike fit.

^ This is dangerous rubbish. Cleat position should be set to optimise your biomechanics – not to prevent cosmetic damage to cranks. I’d much rather scuff the cranks a bit than destroy my knees, but I suppose YMMV…

Dangerous rubbish?!! In my 30+ years of cycling, I’ve never seen a NEED for somebody’s heels/ankles to rub the crank arms for biomechanical reasons. Plus, if you are rubbing your heels consistently enough to warrant some sort of metal shield on the crankarms, you are wasting watts… sorry, not sorry – that’s just science! Scuff your cranks every now and then, fine bro. Rub with every pedal stroke? Learn how to set your cleats up correctly, or get wider pedal axles if you’ve got giant feet.

I’ve size 48 feet, cleats as far out as possible, axle shims too if needed. When pedaling I don’t tend to noticeably scuff the crank arms, but when I’m riding level cranked, or dipping in and out of rollers, weight shifts etc. they do scuff. I’ve only ever worn through one set of Xt cranks (drive side), but I have worn through a NDS chainstay with a combination of techy riding and UK wet grit. I don’t use carbon cranks for this reason, but these plates are IMO a good idea as for me, it’s just one of those things.

Now, after reading your responses, I have to assume English isn’t your first language and that proper bike fitting isn’t your first or second language. You should fit your bike around your body dynamics, not the other way around. Typically that means pedal float and/or repositioning on flats will cause *most people that have been correctly fitted* to rub the arms occasionally. Over time, yes, that will cut through paint or ano. No one that checked you said constant rubbing of the cranks was good or that the arm protector on these was an absolute requirement to prevent the cranks from failing. Apparently, you do though. Which is weird, Mr. “That’s Science” guy.

You don’t like these? Great. Don’t buy them. But don’t suggest stupid fit solutions just to avoid scuffing the arms. And yes, what you are suggesting IS STUPID. Sorry, not sorry, that’s *actual* science. Not “how to avoid scuffing your arms” science.

Perhaps you should read your response, as you just confirmed my point and argued it for me… thanks! Over time occasional rubbing wouldn’t be an issue… constant rubbing will be. How obtuse must you be not to get that I’m saying this is an unnecessary ‘feature’ on these cranks?

If you’re a constant crank-rubbing oversize foot person, you know what? Don’t by carbon cranks! Furthermore, don’t expect a carbon crankset to have a ridiculous ‘scuff plate’ on it to satisfy your ill fit, or massive feet. The vast majority of riders do not ‘need’ to set the Q-factor so narrow it forces rubbing!

News flash for you: When you are wasting watts scuffing every pedal stroke, those who don’t will be passing you and winning a race. Or they’ll simply be happily enjoying parts that last because they bought something that doesn’t have a ‘feature’ they don’t need.

Feel free to hurl more insults if you like, but I am quite confident wasted energy is not ideal. Go ahead and refute that science, Roger… I’ll wait for your comical banter.

Well, I’d like to start by congratulating you on your tenacity in making up and sticking to the argument that anyone is saying constantly rubbing the arms is ok and not less efficient. My obviously inferior brain thinks that’s called a straw man, no? But why is your clearly superior brain stuck on regurgitating that same argument over and over again? Because you think you need to win some theoretical race against someone trying to prove constant crank rubbing isn’t a big deal, I guess? That’s a question for the ages. No one debated that point and yet, here you are hammering it into burger to avoid acknowledging that your fit suggestions are “That’s science! Durr” level stupid.

Back to the original point, is that plate a gimmick? Yeah, duh. Solving a very exaggerated problem very few people have. And I totally get it: You don’t like how it looks because you’re a *very smart guy*. But I’m wondering, as clearly you’re gifted with a supreme undebatable intellect, in your amazing 30+ years of riding, how you manage to get so rageful over a little crank plate and have not had a complete aneurysm over some of the truly stupid and dangerous parts the industry has produced?

Roger, I’ve never strayed from my points on this and I intend to defend them regardless of any insults, going all the way back to the start of this…

Rageful? No… just determined not to let bullies hijack the conversation and warp my message: this is a solution to a problem that ‘shouldn’t’ exist, if you’re riding correctly. Change your fit to prevent rub? That’s not altering things to accommodate, but rather CORRECTING a problem, which has consequences to both equipment and output. SCIENCE. Oooooooh, I used that word again!! How rude of me.

Hammering the points – yes, because I’m basing the comments on LOGIC and EXPERIENCE. I cannot speak of yours, I can only provide my opinions – take or leave them/ But you dive right in with your “worst hot takes” “try it sometime” blasts from the get go. Hmmm, I wonder why I’d be defensive… jeeze, how odd my feathers might be ruffled! The audacity!

I said these scuff plates were unnecessary. I even postulated alternatives that exist if you’ve got big feet. But no, everyone likes to blast the guy who makes a valid point early on. Roger, maybe look up what IMHO means.

You know what? For all of those that really defend the need for a ‘scuff plate’ occasionally or consistently, maybe you can look into getting some plastic covers for your couch cushions. I would also recommend a vinyl ‘bra’ for your car grille. Enjoy!

I wear a size 50 or 51, ride clipless, and have always had heel-rub and scuffing on every bike, with every pedal, with any biometrically appropriate setup.

Your ‘point’ is invalid. Your ‘opinion’ is stated as a fact, and that fact is demonstrably wrong.

Just because you’re wrong doesn’t mean you can’t be offended by people pointing out that you’re wrong.

Size 51? That’s enormous, and with your history of rub with your large feet, I bet you’re smart enough to know that carbon cranks would probably not be best for you. Furthermore, since most people don’t have Size 51 shoes, why should carbon cranks be designed with scuff plates for ‘occasional’ rubbing? Unless these were cranks designed to meet the special needs of larger riders… then sure.

And I’d like to point out Chunk, I am not ‘wrong’. I have an opinion based on logic and reasoning. When somebody replies to my opinion in a derogatory and disrespectful way, my tone will be appropriately terse and blunt. Lastly due to your size, I’d sincerely look into a wider q-factor and/or other solutions to rid you of your power-robbing rub.

Noooope. You are wrong. You have an opinion based on your anecdotal experience and opinion, not logic or reasoning because it completely disregards all formal and accepted understanding of how to fit a bicycle, especially taking into account how you’re hyper-focused on “efficiency.” You literally obsess over the fact that it’s less efficient to rub the arms and then completely disregard pedaling efficiency and proper fit by saying just make it wider. It’s amazing that in your 30+ years of cycling, you’ve clearly never talked to a legitimate fit professional, because they would have disabused you of that nonsense in the first ten minutes.

So, yeah. We will continue to ridicule your ill-informed opinions until we get bored. Which feels like right… about… now…

At this point it’s now comical how you can’t accept the logic that I’ve put forth…

Even though you continue to piss on top of each of my opinions like a feral dog trying to assert dominance, I’ll can now deduce that it’s 100% impossible for you to comprehend that:

1. I have an opinion based on 30 years of experience in the cycling industry, combined with basic science skills that say unnecessary friction is wasted energy.

2. Larger footed people probably should not use carbon cranks if they can’t find solutions to prevent continual crank rubbing. Unless they like rubbing, wearing away carbon, and buying new cranks.

3. Scuff protectors are a ‘solution’ to a problem that doesn’t exist. Continual rubbing is a problem to begin with, and a lame/marketing attempt to abate the issue with scuff-plates is basically a Pontiac Aztec, designed by committee.

4. Nobody said you had to radically adjust your fit – I suggested a PROPER setup that does not result in continual, power-robbing rubbing. Wider pedal axles, maybe cranks that have a better q-factor for larger riders, etc. There are MANY ways to avoid rubbing (beyond the occasional rub) that don’t involve some sort of rigged steel plate after-effect.

5. If you can’t comprehend the logic put forth, that is not my fault. Feel free to lobby more insults, but I suggest in the future you craft your retort without an inflammatory tone if you can’t handle a terse response to your churlish comments.

6. Sadly it seems I won’t be able to help you Roger: you can continue to be bored and subsequently slower… due to power loss and possibly mental capacity.

Happy riding though! And happy continued crankset and shoe replacements with your continued rubbing. Cheers to second place!

Gold nitride titanium would be a lot more blingtastic.

Boutique cranks are fine, but not for me; the cranks that come with just about any bike, from cheap to pricey, work just fine. If I had carbon cranks on my mountain bike, I’d worry about the cranks more than anything else, even with so-called scuff protection. Just sayin’.

So not made in BC any more?

I’m 150lbs and I’ve snapped a RF pedal insert out, resulting in a bad crash. So now the claim is, “trust us, its stronger now” with nothing else to back it up? No thanks, I’ll never ride RF again. If anyone is curious, RF Sixc, insert snapped in bike park on small feature landing. RF did not cover under warranty.

© Copyright 2022 Bikerumor, All Rights Reserved