SRAM 2019?

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
jlok
Posts: 713
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 3:30 am

by jlok

btw, which current top end direct drive trainer potentially could support this SRAM road 12x?
Giant Propel Advanced SL Disc 1 / BMC TM02 < Propel Adv < TCR Adv SL Disc < KTM Revelator Sky < CAAD 12 Disc < Domane S Disc < Alize < CAAD 10

ooo
Posts: 629
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:59 pm

by ooo

JetBlack WhisperDrive

https://www.jetblackcycling.com/product ... ve-smart-1

Axle Compatibility with 9mm x 130mm or 135mm, 12mm x 142mm and now BOOST. 148mm BOOST Adaptors sold separately.
Cassette Compatibility Shimano/SRAM 10/11 Speed, Campy, and XD drivers sold separately.
'

by Weenie


TobinHatesYou
Posts: 1878
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

ooo wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 2:13 am
JetBlack WhisperDrive

https://www.jetblackcycling.com/product ... ve-smart-1

Axle Compatibility with 9mm x 130mm or 135mm, 12mm x 142mm and now BOOST. 148mm BOOST Adaptors sold separately.
Cassette Compatibility Shimano/SRAM 10/11 Speed, Campy, and XD drivers sold separately.
Unless they make an XDR body, that's a nope for now.

Some trainers probably use common freehubs like NovaTecs? Maybe the CycleOps Hammer, but again they'd need to be shipping an XDR body or you'd need to be using a MTB XD body and cassette.

ooo
Posts: 629
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:59 pm

by ooo

JetBlack offer XD mtb freehub body, so they have enough "potential" (jlok was asking about potential) to make XDr body

Other trainers do not have XD mtb option, some of them may have axle system that is not compatible with any type of 10T

CycleOps Hammer (while amazon advertising list XD mtb "potential") as of 2018-03-30 do not have mtb XD mtb option:
https://support.cycleops.com/hc/en-us/a ... ompatible-
'

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 1878
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

The badly kept secret is that current CycleOps/PowerTap hubs just use Novatec hardware.

User avatar
mortirolo
Posts: 81
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 10:08 am
Location: EU

by mortirolo

SRAM: 10t cog is maximize drivetrain efficiency. Oh, wait. +5Watt
Ceramicspeed: You need 17t oversized pulleys. Oh, wait. +2Watt, because aero.
They need some engineers, because They hired too many marketing guy, I guess.

I keep my SR11, but I would be happy with campagnolo SR12, "oversized" 12t pulleys and an 11-32 cassette.
Marco Pantani - Momenti Di Gloria

bilwit
Posts: 966
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 5:49 am
Location: Seattle, WA

by bilwit

de lars cuevas wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:23 pm
This guys head looks like SRAM HRD Hoods. :D

Image
they still couldn't shrink those massive hoods ala 9170? that's a shame.. hopefully it's changed before release :x
mortirolo wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:01 pm
SRAM: 10t cog is maximize drivetrain efficiency. Oh, wait. +5Watt
Ceramicspeed: You need 17t oversized pulleys. Oh, wait. +2Watt, because aero.
They need some engineers, because They hired too many marketing guy, I guess.

I keep my SR11, but I would be happy with campagnolo SR12, "oversized" 12t pulleys and an 11-32 cassette.
seeing these huge ass new clutch rear mechs isn't very inspiring either :noidea:

RocketRacing
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 2:43 am

by RocketRacing

Ahhh... “progress”

I am all for it. Range is good, choice is good. But i am sure an 11-25 10 speed casette was far more aero than and 10-36 12 speed could hope to be. But then 36-50 will beat 39-53 up front... maybe it is a wash. Same for weight.

Wide range is best for “the rest of us”, not “the best of us”. If I am spinning my 32 cog up the hill I am quite simply “losing”... but i like to ride easy some days, so i have it, and use it. On my mountain bike i am in no rush to go 12 speed. I just don’t use more than 32-42 and swapped back from a wider range casette.

But when bike choice gives more options for more buyers (one size fits all), it will happen. It is business. And that is ok.

Right now a compact 50-34 with 11-32 works fine for my needs.

parajba
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:00 pm
Location: London, United Kingdom

by parajba

Hoods are still ugly. Massive and squared. Am not going to buy it until they sort them out. Can’t believe I am saying this, but makes the Durace Di2 look pretty.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 1878
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

10t cog is a negligible efficiency loss according to the Zero Friction Cycling guy’s comments in the CT article. In a controlled setting with clean drivetrains, probably like 0.5W lost going from 53x11 to 48x10. I think we'll live.

Cemicar
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2017 7:40 am

by Cemicar

Why did they mask pretty much every area where logo was supposed to be?

Maybe this new groupset had a new name like Red24 that they wanted to keep secret?

User avatar
mortirolo
Posts: 81
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 10:08 am
Location: EU

by mortirolo

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:25 am
10t cog is a negligible efficiency loss according to the Zero Friction Cycling guy’s comments in the CT article. In a controlled setting with clean drivetrains, probably like 0.5W lost going from 53x11 to 48x10. I think we'll live.
We'll ride on a laboratory test pad in a clean room. I think we'll live.
Marco Pantani - Momenti Di Gloria

aeroisnteverything
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:43 pm

by aeroisnteverything

I am completely at a loss of what this really achieves and why the hell we need yet another complication with free-hub cross-compatibility standards. Can someone explain in a non-bs way? I sort of don't care when Campag goes 12sp - I don't ride them and their freehub bodies were already incompatible with SRAM/Shimano, so that one lives on its own merit: if it's better, ppl with buy it, if it is worse, they will not and it will die.

Sram, and what is sure to follow Shimano - a different matter. We got new freehub standards now, which are not cross-compatible with one another nor backwards compatible with 11sp systems. How will that all work with existing wheels? Is there an expectation that we will be buying freehub components to istall onto old wheels? (What an unnecessary PITA)! Or do they expect ppl to buy new wheels? (F... that!) And if I am buying SRAM-equipped bike, am I now locked into them due to freehub incompatibility? Since the same is true for Shimano and since the majority of bikes are sold with Shimano, this is actually likely to hurt SRAM a fair bit - fewer people will consider switching to SRAM since it's a pain to just "try it out".

And yeah, we've been through this before with a 10-11sp change, but come on. This just seems wholly unnecessary. Yes, extra range is generally good, but that 10t cog and the extra width of the cassette does come with an efficiency cost. And a weight penalty. You gain some weight back up front, with a smaller chainring, but not all of it. And that rear derailleur looks absolutely huge and not at all like something that might be lighter or more aero than the existing version. So aero is probably a wash or a small net loss. There might be tighter gearing spacing in some spots, but honestly - is anyone really complaining about big jumps on 11sp? Really???

All that is to say: I would MUCH rather that SRAM focused on: 1) improving the weight of e-tap to go down to SRAM Red mechanical used to be (and a corresponding reduction to eTap HRD); 2) make those ugly hydraulic hoods at least as sleek as shimano, 3) match or beat shimano in shift quality and speed while maintaining wireless setup; 4) (lower priority) offer customizable shift logic like shimano with an app and whatnot. Hitting the above marks would feel like an improvement. And given the sheer simplicity of wireless setup, even hitting 3 out of the above 4 would make SRAM a geniunely top choice among groupsets. Adding another cog to the cassette just seems lazy and a bit of a copout.

And if we are going down the path of adding cogs, let's go all the way to 13-speed, and make that a 1x drivetrain that is lighter than SRAM Red mechanical, and at that point has essentially zero compromises compared to a 2x in terms of shifting range or spacing. Say going from 10t to 34-36t the back, and 48 or 46 at the front. I'd buy the logic of that. SRAM has like 160g to play with from the removal of the front mech, while adding sprockets at the back and removing chainring and reducing size at the front might be something like a wash, so the weight target seems at least plausible.

Shrike
Posts: 1391
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

Just no, to everything he said :D

by Weenie


2lo8
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:32 am

by 2lo8

aeroisnteverything wrote:
Wed Nov 07, 2018 7:09 pm
I am completely at a loss of what this really achieves and why the hell we need yet another complication with free-hub cross-compatibility standards. [snip]
You're making the mistake thinking the Shimano HG spline standard was an open standard. It's not like Campagnolo made their own standard just to be different (okay, maybe they did), they existed when Shimano made the jump to cassettes. When SRAM entered the market, they just hopped on the Shimano bandwagon, since Shimano was the dominant player, and the standard was no longer strictly controlled by Shimano for whatever reason.

Shimano HG splines have some real drawbacks. They don't allow 10t cogs (except Capreo), and it is cheaper to extend range without adding cost (to the consumable cassette) and weight. The splines were designed to be made from steel because the ratcheting meachinism used to be integrated with the freehub body. Lighter ones need workarounds like deeper splines such as the failed DA 7800 freehub standard, Campy splines, or those steel anti-bite strips, which I doubt Shimano wants to license. This standard has existed and resisted change for so long because of market and standards driven inertia.

Again, SRAM only used Shimano's cassette pattern because they were the underdog and wanted compatibility for rapid adoption. Now that they're established, it's not a priority, although I'm sure SRAM still wants to be an OEM supplier of HG cassettes. Using Shimano standards means SRAM always had to be a year behind so they could reverse engineer and copy Shimano standards. It also meant they couldn't stagger tiered releases like Shimano. All of these companies would love to lock you in to be a captured market.
[6.6kg of no carbon fiber]
[2lo8.wordpress.com]
Your one-stop source for information and reviews on cheap eBay bike junk.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post