Where is new SRAM Red?

[pmprego]

So, as i see things form new 2x12 red and 1x13 now is: Chain is there same and rdy, shifters are there rdy for 13, cranks and chainrings are there rdy(new chainline and offset on 1x aero rings vs old red), front d. and chainline is now set and rdy for switch to 2x13. All thas is missing is 10-36 13 speed cassette and RD update(or perhaps new RD). Probably they will wait till new dura ace.

13 speed requires UDH, so currently almost zero ROAD frames.

Let us see how that develops...

I'd bet money that ALL new mainstream road frames released will be UDH compatible. Thus, SRAM just has to go over their regular product lifecycle (let's say 3 years) to have the compatibility problem solved. They will probably have to create a UHD RD for road (meaning, with bigger focus on weight compared to the current gravel offering).

In any of these companies, the roadmap for the next 5 years is already detailled. Heck... they even have to plan 20 years ahead.

Indeed road will have UDH.. Not that it is detailed, but actually they have already tested it and standard start to emerge on frame manufacturing companies(they have information).. UDH already on new Madone is clear indicator. I assume Trek is closest to sram via lidl-trek.. Imo canyon and specialized could be next.

They will finally move to smaller derailleur batteries to offset the weight of that 14t and 16t for the 10-36 and 10-33 respectively.

[Bikera]

Why? Bcos retrofitting UDH on old bikes may mean less sales of new UDH bikes?

They modified part of the axs derailleur part, something sram obviously doesn’t want

Ic. Wonder why Ceramic Speed does not get sued. OSPW does not count as modifying the RD?

Anything to do with UDH requires a licence from SRAM. UDH is a SRAM proprietary standard, which companies can licence to use on their frames and perhaps other products too. This may be SRAM are able to prevent anyone else making an adapter.

On the one hand you'd think it would benefit SRAM to encourage wider adoption UDH by allowing any frame to become UDH compatible (sell more UDH RD's). But on the other hand there is a risk an adapter would actually be quite bad at recreating the benefits of UDH (e.g. added stiffness) and so would risk the standard falling into disrepute.

I'm fairly convinced that: 1) T-type RD's on UDH gravel/road frames provides a huge improvement in RD shifting, robustness, simplicity,... and the transition should move forward (and an adapter will probably not be part of this transition), 2) Many (most?) of us don't get a new free bike everytime we race (i.e., top pros) or have the $$ to buy a new bike whenever we want, 3) Some of us due to timing or who are willing to divert their disposable income to buy a new bike or frame in order to enjoy the benefits of a T-type RD will go for it now.

At the moment I can see why SRAM chose to make RED XPLR only UDH. But the exclusivity, cache, $$... of this will only work for so long in selling product even at the exclusivity level of RED XPLR. Therefore I think they will soon need a standard dropout mount 13s RD choice to sell more people on the benefits of 1x13 for road biking (or maybe they only want to convince a few for now?).

All of this to say I am willing to wait and see how this shakes out (i.e., will there be a standard dropout Force 13s XPLR released?) especially since I am still skeptical of RED XPLR's design compromises that result in a "bad chainline" (i.e., the wide crank spindle requirement couple w/ a 46t cog that's dished further inboard to make it fit XDR and use a 12s).

[TobinHatesYou]

I'm fairly convinced that: 1) T-type RD's on UDH gravel/road frames provides a huge improvement in RD shifting, robustness, simplicity,... and the transition should move forward (and an adapter will probably not be part of this transition), 2) Many (most?) of us don't get a new free bike everytime we race (i.e., top pros) or have the $$ to buy a new bike whenever we want, 3) Some of us due to timing or who are willing to divert their disposable income to buy a new bike or frame in order to enjoy the benefits of a T-type RD will go for it now.

At the moment I can see why SRAM chose to make RED XPLR only UDH. But the exclusivity, cache, $$... of this will only work for so long in selling product even at the exclusivity level of RED XPLR. Therefore I think they will soon need a standard dropout mount 13s RD choice to sell more people on the benefits of 1x13 for road biking (or maybe they only want to convince a few for now?).

All of this to say I am willing to wait and see how this shakes out (i.e., will there be a standard dropout Force 13s XPLR released?) especially since I am still skeptical of RED XPLR's design compromises that result in a "bad chainline" (i.e., the wide crank spindle requirement couple w/ a 46t cog that's dished further inboard to make it fit XDR and use a 12s).

Sorry, but again no.

The way SRAM has designed it, is ONLY made possible by the full-mount design. There will not be 2x13 AXS group with regular hanger, it's not possible. Mounting the derailleur directly into the frame frees up enough room for SRAM to shift the entire cassette outboard by 2.5mm. This also allows them to add that 13th cog in the back without having to use a full 5mm of overhang. If you look at the chain clearance to the inboard edge of the full-mount, it is sculpted so that the chain actually partially overhangs the mount.

[Bikera]

I'm fairly convinced that: 1) T-type RD's on UDH gravel/road frames provides a huge improvement in RD shifting, robustness, simplicity,... and the transition should move forward (and an adapter will probably not be part of this transition), 2) Many (most?) of us don't get a new free bike everytime we race (i.e., top pros) or have the $$ to buy a new bike whenever we want, 3) Some of us due to timing or who are willing to divert their disposable income to buy a new bike or frame in order to enjoy the benefits of a T-type RD will go for it now.

At the moment I can see why SRAM chose to make RED XPLR only UDH. But the exclusivity, cache, $$... of this will only work for so long in selling product even at the exclusivity level of RED XPLR. Therefore I think they will soon need a standard dropout mount 13s RD choice to sell more people on the benefits of 1x13 for road biking (or maybe they only want to convince a few for now?).

All of this to say I am willing to wait and see how this shakes out (i.e., will there be a standard dropout Force 13s XPLR released?) especially since I am still skeptical of RED XPLR's design compromises that result in a "bad chainline" (i.e., the wide crank spindle requirement couple w/ a 46t cog that's dished further inboard to make it fit XDR and use a 12s).

Sorry, but again no.

The way SRAM has designed it, is ONLY made possible by the full-mount design. There will not be 2x13 AXS group with regular hanger, it's not possible. Mounting the derailleur directly into the frame frees up enough room for SRAM to shift the entire cassette outboard by 2.5mm. This also allows them to add that 13th cog in the back without having to use a full 5mm of overhang. If you look at the chain clearance to the inboard edge of the full-mount, it is sculpted so that the chain actually partially overhangs the mount.

At least I keep trying and thanks for the educated/clear details Didn't know that a UDH frame w/ a T-type derailleur provides added space to move the cassette a bit outboard (when a UDH or non-UDH frame w/ an RD hanger won't). I haven't seen this level of detail in the "press" (most of the reviews hardly mention anything about how SRAM fit a 13th cog on a cassette w/ cog-to-cog spacing for a 12s chain and, when they do, it sounded like it was all due to the dishing of the 46t). Will look at a UDH/T-type bike next to one w/ an RD hanger to better visualize this. Otherwise at least that also makes my "bad chainline" concern moot and explains the need for a wide crankset spindle. Will still wait for some longer-term reports on how well SRAM's 1x13 works but at least I can prepare for either a new frame or upgrading my Roubaix w/ a newer gen 2x12.

[TobinHatesYou]

At least I keep trying and thanks for the educated/clear details Didn't know that a UDH frame w/ a T-type derailleur provides added space to move the cassette a bit outboard (when a UDH or non-UDH frame w/ an RD hanger won't). I haven't seen this level of detail in the "press" (most of the reviews hardly mention anything about how SRAM fit a 13th cog on a cassette w/ cog-to-cog spacing for a 12s chain and, when they do, it sounded like it was all due to the dishing of the 46t). Will look at a UDH/T-type bike next to one w/ an RD hanger to better visualize this. Otherwise at least that also makes my "bad chainline" concern moot and explains the need for a wide crankset spindle. Will still wait for some longer-term reports on how well SRAM's 1x13 works but at least I can prepare for either a new frame or upgrading my Roubaix w/ a newer gen 2x12.

Try to visualize a chain on the last cog. It would overhang the barreled portion of the mount.

[OtterSpace]

Adding some truncated info from my SL6 rim build regarding E1 crankarm mods. If you want more detailed info check there.

Cane Creek #BAI0030 preloader adds around 4g which is unchanged from D1.

I wouldn't recommend this to anyone but super optimizers but you can remove the self extracting cap to save around 4.7g but it looks ugly unless vinyl wrapped and you want the cap installed when removing the cranks.

[Bikera]

At least I keep trying and thanks for the educated/clear details Didn't know that a UDH frame w/ a T-type derailleur provides added space to move the cassette a bit outboard (when a UDH or non-UDH frame w/ an RD hanger won't). I haven't seen this level of detail in the "press" (most of the reviews hardly mention anything about how SRAM fit a 13th cog on a cassette w/ cog-to-cog spacing for a 12s chain and, when they do, it sounded like it was all due to the dishing of the 46t). Will look at a UDH/T-type bike next to one w/ an RD hanger to better visualize this. Otherwise at least that also makes my "bad chainline" concern moot and explains the need for a wide crankset spindle. Will still wait for some longer-term reports on how well SRAM's 1x13 works but at least I can prepare for either a new frame or upgrading my Roubaix w/ a newer gen 2x12.

Try to visualize a chain on the last cog. It would overhang the barreled portion of the mount.

I took a similar picture of my Roubaix as yours above of the UDH/T-type RD. It's hard to visualize from these pics whether the cassette in your pic is 2.5mm further outboard (if anything it looks a bit further inboard) and why a T-type adapter couldn't also be sculpted to have the chain overhang it (though, of course, with an adapter the RD is moved to a different location relative to the cassette so I could see it not shifting properly even if an adapter were possible). Otherwise what also matters to me (for chain noise concerns) is the distance of the 1st & 13th cog from the chainline which can't be readily seen but only measured.

Curiosity & visualization from two comparative pics aside I'm happy to follow your guidance (vs. that of the "press") that "There will not be 2x13 AXS group with regular hanger"

[TobinHatesYou]

At least I keep trying and thanks for the educated/clear details Didn't know that a UDH frame w/ a T-type derailleur provides added space to move the cassette a bit outboard (when a UDH or non-UDH frame w/ an RD hanger won't). I haven't seen this level of detail in the "press" (most of the reviews hardly mention anything about how SRAM fit a 13th cog on a cassette w/ cog-to-cog spacing for a 12s chain and, when they do, it sounded like it was all due to the dishing of the 46t). Will look at a UDH/T-type bike next to one w/ an RD hanger to better visualize this. Otherwise at least that also makes my "bad chainline" concern moot and explains the need for a wide crankset spindle. Will still wait for some longer-term reports on how well SRAM's 1x13 works but at least I can prepare for either a new frame or upgrading my Roubaix w/ a newer gen 2x12.

Try to visualize a chain on the last cog. It would overhang the barreled portion of the mount.

I took a similar picture of my Roubaix as yours above of the UDH/T-type RD. It's hard to visualize from these pics whether the cassette in your pic is 2.5mm further outboard (if anything it looks a bit further inboard) and why a T-type adapter couldn't also be sculpted to have the chain overhang it (though, of course, with an adapter the RD is moved to a different location relative to the cassette so I could see it not shifting properly even if an adapter were possible). Otherwise what also matters to me (for chain noise concerns) is the distance of the 1st & 13th cog from the chainline which can't be readily seen but only measured.
IMG_3282.JPG

Curiosity & visualization from two comparative pics aside I'm happy to follow your guidance (vs. that of the "press") that "There will not be 2x13 AXS group with regular hanger"

You have no idea what to look for and no idea how any of this works.

You can tell the cassette is further outboard because the hub axle endcap is barely exposed. Don’t base your perception around the dropout distance, which has clearly been designed specifically for UDH in my example.

Plus in order to create a “full-mount” sandwich in your example, the inboard structural member would have to protrude farther into the space occupied by the cassette.

[Minirac]

I dont know why people are so resistant to change? UDH will come to road and in 1 or 2 years everybody will use it and forget all about it and about old d.hanger.. It hapens all the time.. QR, then specialized 135 SCS, then 142x12, 148x12, boost.. Bikes always evolve and adopt for better.

[ads]

Really basic question so please excuse it as it's my first hydraulic build: If I buy the brakes in EU setup (front brake on left lever etc) is it just a case of switching the lines and calipers at the lever to change to a UK setup or is there more to it?

[kytyree]

Really basic question so please excuse it as it's my first hydraulic build: If I buy the brakes in EU setup (front brake on left lever etc) is it just a case of switching the lines and calipers at the lever to change to a UK setup or is there more to it?

https://docs.sram.com/en-US/publication ... leed-block

That's the sram instructions for shortening and bleeding the lines. After you remove the lines from the shifters you can reinstall them in either side, the fittings are the same.

[Hexsense]

IMG_3282.JPG

That just won't work with cassette move 2.5mm outboard. The 10t cog wouldn't be usable.
Imagine cassette move out to the point your hub end cap barely expose. Then not only the chain (using 10t cog) will rub the hanger. It'll also rub your frame on the seatstay as well.
So, even specially designed hanger it still wouldn't work with T-type cassette. You might also need custom 13 speed cassette that shift the entire thing back to the left, over the wheel spokes. At that point are you still consider it Sram 13 speed system?

Still, fitment shown in the picture is still better than example I typed in page 97 (previous page) in a sense that T-type cassette without chain could probably still can spin. I've found some frame have derailleur hanger tab that rub the cassette directly even without chain.

[ads]

Really basic question so please excuse it as it's my first hydraulic build: If I buy the brakes in EU setup (front brake on left lever etc) is it just a case of switching the lines and calipers at the lever to change to a UK setup or is there more to it?

https://docs.sram.com/en-US/publication ... leed-block

That's the sram instructions for shortening and bleeding the lines. After you remove the lines from the shifters you can reinstall them in either side, the fittings are the same.

Cheers. Yeah thought it'd be ok but wasn't sure if there was a nuance I wasn't aware of

[B0tt0mline]

Again a great ride today with the 1x13 - really like it.

Thinking of changing my Alugear to a Garbaruk front chain ring as the Alugear is quite load...

[Bikera]

At least I keep trying and thanks for the educated/clear details Didn't know that a UDH frame w/ a T-type derailleur provides added space to move the cassette a bit outboard (when a UDH or non-UDH frame w/ an RD hanger won't). I haven't seen this level of detail in the "press" (most of the reviews hardly mention anything about how SRAM fit a 13th cog on a cassette w/ cog-to-cog spacing for a 12s chain and, when they do, it sounded like it was all due to the dishing of the 46t). Will look at a UDH/T-type bike next to one w/ an RD hanger to better visualize this. Otherwise at least that also makes my "bad chainline" concern moot and explains the need for a wide crankset spindle. Will still wait for some longer-term reports on how well SRAM's 1x13 works but at least I can prepare for either a new frame or upgrading my Roubaix w/ a newer gen 2x12.

Try to visualize a chain on the last cog. It would overhang the barreled portion of the mount.

I took a similar picture of my Roubaix as yours above of the UDH/T-type RD. It's hard to visualize from these pics whether the cassette in your pic is 2.5mm further outboard (if anything it looks a bit further inboard) and why a T-type adapter couldn't also be sculpted to have the chain overhang it (though, of course, with an adapter the RD is moved to a different location relative to the cassette so I could see it not shifting properly even if an adapter were possible). Otherwise what also matters to me (for chain noise concerns) is the distance of the 1st & 13th cog from the chainline which can't be readily seen but only measured.
IMG_3282.JPG

Curiosity & visualization from two comparative pics aside I'm happy to follow your guidance (vs. that of the "press") that "There will not be 2x13 AXS group with regular hanger"

You have no idea what to look for and no idea how any of this works.

You can tell the cassette is further outboard because the hub axle endcap is barely exposed. Don’t base your perception around the dropout distance, which has clearly been designed specifically for UDH in my example.

Plus in order to create a “full-mount” sandwich in your example, the inboard structural member would have to protrude farther into the space occupied by the cassette.

I said that it's hard for me to to visualize what's going on in the pictures and that I would follow your advice (meaning I don't have any idea what I'm looking at...but did I really need to say that too?), so why bother with the arrogant (insulting?) "You have no idea how any of this works." statement? If you left that out I'd be sayin "thank you" and that I'm now convinced that I need to choose between a new UDH bike w/ RED XPLR 13s or stick with a newer gen 2x upgrade for my Roubaix. But now it seems more appropriate to just say "thanks but no thanks"...tough crowd on this thread!