SRAM 2019?

[Skillgannon]

SRAM said that they were looking to do a Force level product, but couldn't do it because there was no way to decrease the costs enough while increasing the weight - the cost was too heavily driven by the motors/batteries, the parts that they would, under their design philosophy, keep the same.

Then can they make it half wireless?
Like wireless shifters as usual,
only FD have receiver and battery, and it link with wire to RD. Or vice versa. Similar to FSA groupset.

Unlikely - it's the motors and the batteries that are the cost there, the cost of the transmitter would be relatively small, especially in the quantities that they're ordering now that dropper posts and other products are being integrated into the family. Plus, that would then break their design philosophy of everything functioning the same. Furthermore, there may be issues with potential patent infringement with FSA (assuming FSA holds any patents).

[Hexsense]

I was thinking only one battery either on FD or RD but not both.
That reduce price of one battery, which isn't that much i guess.
Isn't FSA licensing some patent from Sram?

[TobinHatesYou]

I was thinking only one battery either on FD or RD but not both.
That reduce price of one battery, which isn't that much i guess.
Isn't FSA licensing some patent from Sram?

Not that I know of. SRAM doesn't have a patent on wireless shifting. They have a patent description for batteries attached to structural members of front and rear derailleurs. FSA WE's design uses a central battery just like Campy EPS and Shimano Di2.

[ancker]

So looks like Force eTap is confirmed then. (At least in branding...)
Those pictures shows Force branded shifters and exactly one cable coming from each, presumedly for brakes.

Really curious what the pricing is going to look like.

[jbaillie]

Richie Porte also without any masking on his eTap 24 (or whatever) from a couple weeks ago.

[grooveninja]

The chainring is bolted to the Quarq using the torx.

Then why does the chainring have an FCC ID and all those power meter related logos? Also you mean to tell me those 8 torx bolts go through the chainring and into the Quarq? That's now how the 8-bolt interface works.

Very very valid. One thing I find interesting as well is that the chainrings are marked “8-bolt” leading me to think that either all the new “direct mount” cranks will use the eight bolt interface, or the Quarq models need specific “8-bolt” compatible rings.

The spline with eight bolts surrounding it are extremely similar (if not identical) to the current eagle Dub MTB chainring/crankset interface w/ 3 bolts. It would not be surprising if more bolts are needs for supporting the 2nd ring as well as rings that are much larger than a 28 - 36t MTB single ring. This would also make it very light for a single ring around cross/gravel applications, also a wide number of manufacturers have been manufacturing MTB chainrings for this interface for years. Kind of makes me wonder if the Quark is the 1 off as 98% (or more) of the cranksets and chainrings they sell will be non-Quark.

[IchDien]

God, the Madone looks awful in that size.

[Nefarious86]

God, the Madone looks awful in that size.

The banter on that post was awesome tho. Rohans "How do you get the water bottles out" and "why do you need disc brakes" comments got a solid chuckle.

[IchDien]

Haha..honestly though how does he get the seat tube bottle out?!

I cringe to think what Pozzovivo's would look like.

[Nefarious86]

They need side loader cages lol

[Ritxis]

They need side loader cages lol

Or Vincero bottle............

[thorerik]

Is there an estimated price for force etap?

[Karvalo]

God, the Madone looks awful in that size.

Yeah what’s going on with that, small bike are usually awesome! Does the isospeed need a certain amount of seat mast free to work properly, hence the crazy slope on the TT?

[commendatore]

The chainring is bolted to the Quarq using the torx.

Then why does the chainring have an FCC ID and all those power meter related logos? Also you mean to tell me those 8 torx bolts go through the chainring and into the Quarq? That's now how the 8-bolt interface works.

Very very valid. One thing I find interesting as well is that the chainrings are marked “8-bolt” leading me to think that either all the new “direct mount” cranks will use the eight bolt interface, or the Quarq models need specific “8-bolt” compatible rings.

The spline with eight bolts surrounding it are extremely similar (if not identical) to the current eagle Dub MTB chainring/crankset interface w/ 3 bolts. It would not be surprising if more bolts are needs for supporting the 2nd ring as well as rings that are much larger than a 28 - 36t MTB single ring. This would also make it very light for a single ring around cross/gravel applications, also a wide number of manufacturers have been manufacturing MTB chainrings for this interface for years. Kind of makes me wonder if the Quark is the 1 off as 98% (or more) of the cranksets and chainrings they sell will be non-Quark.

Quark spiders have always been 8 bolt (as are the power ready Prime cranksets) while the road and MTB “regular” cranksets have used 3 bolts for direct mount rings or traditional BCD spiders

[AZR3]

Then why does the chainring have an FCC ID and all those power meter related logos? Also you mean to tell me those 8 torx bolts go through the chainring and into the Quarq? That's now how the 8-bolt interface works.

Very very valid. One thing I find interesting as well is that the chainrings are marked “8-bolt” leading me to think that either all the new “direct mount” cranks will use the eight bolt interface, or the Quarq models need specific “8-bolt” compatible rings.

The spline with eight bolts surrounding it are extremely similar (if not identical) to the current eagle Dub MTB chainring/crankset interface w/ 3 bolts. It would not be surprising if more bolts are needs for supporting the 2nd ring as well as rings that are much larger than a 28 - 36t MTB single ring. This would also make it very light for a single ring around cross/gravel applications, also a wide number of manufacturers have been manufacturing MTB chainrings for this interface for years. Kind of makes me wonder if the Quark is the 1 off as 98% (or more) of the cranksets and chainrings they sell will be non-Quark.

Quark spiders have always been 8 bolt (as are the power ready Prime cranksets) while the road and MTB “regular” cranksets have used 3 bolts for direct mount rings or traditional BCD spiders

They haven’t always been 8 bolt, the older models used the 3 bolt style. I believe those were the ones that you had to send in if you wanted to change chainrings so Quarq could recalibrate it.