M900, M560, M320 crankset: are they the same?

[tweedi]

Those 3 Shimano cranksets from the same era (1993 / 1994) have a very similar look and have the same weight.

In fact surprisingly the lower spec (M320) is the lightest..

Now the chainrings of the Exage are almost twice heavier than other rings, but for the crankset itself, I struggle to see the difference.

So what do you think? Are they actually that different? Would one know a difference between them if they did not know which they were?

Curious to hear your views.

 

[bikeworkshop]

Higher quality shimano chainsets have a superior alloy and metal structure.
The better quality ones will be stiffer and stronger.
There may be details on their website.

The chainrings come in heavy but long- lasting steel, super soft alloy midrange and then harder alloy up the range.

 

[boxxer]

M900 was closer to M563 than any of the others but it was still different.

 

[ishaw]

I stupidly paint stripped my LX ones bits so they looked like m900. They were identical iirc.

 

[Tootyred]

Better chainsets are forged rather than cast...

 

[boxxer]

I stupidly paint stripped my LX ones bits so they looked like m900. They were identical iirc.

I did it too, they were heavier and had cast marks where XTR did not. I suspect some of the later ones were closer to XTR

 

[minor_LEGEND]

Exage M320 are a great crankset, I have a set on one of my bikes. Underrated, cheap & decent quality. Exage ES & LT were the same, just polished or painted finish.