That is sooooo 2015!
Is Sram introducing the 1 x 12?
- Thread starter Mo(n)arch
- Start date
new trail compactor standards for 2016
You're missing the ironic inversion of fatbike riders whining about skinny bikes cutting up groomed trails on snow.
To be fair, that's about the same price, and cheaper on a per-speed basis than XX1 11speed.E-agle should make e-bikes more efficient, no?
Also, $420 / cassette, $85 / chain, $99 / chainring.
It's also more than double the cost of an XTR 11 speed cassette, and substantially more for the chain and ring too. I also think the XTR stuff shifts better than XX1.
I'm pretty sure that's called XC skis fatbikers!
this whole ordeal has got me re-thinking why I went 1x in the first place... I think it was to lose that left shifter/cable/derailleur. Also, I kept dropping the chain off the granny on long rides once the chain got dirty and gritty. I also think having a 3x crankset where I was running granny/32/bash did not lend itself to a good chainline.
What I like about 1x is not having to think about two separate shifters, and not losing the chain anymore (those narrow-wide teeth sure do work). There are times when I do miss the granny, but it doesn't happen all that often. I'm running a 32 front, 11-36 cassette. I've been toying with the idea of getting a pie-plate, but I don't exactly like the notion of lengthening the chain, it's already pretty slack in the 11-32 combo... nor do I like the thought of adding unsprung weight.
Decisions, decisions... I guess the solution is "gearbox"
What I like about 1x is not having to think about two separate shifters, and not losing the chain anymore (those narrow-wide teeth sure do work). There are times when I do miss the granny, but it doesn't happen all that often. I'm running a 32 front, 11-36 cassette. I've been toying with the idea of getting a pie-plate, but I don't exactly like the notion of lengthening the chain, it's already pretty slack in the 11-32 combo... nor do I like the thought of adding unsprung weight.
Decisions, decisions... I guess the solution is "gearbox"
No argument on the XTR shifting better, and they last a lot longer, but do carry a 70 gram weight penalty. But the Sram XX1 chainrings have always been $100, so really the only major cost difference is in the chain, and that's only $20something dollars more if we're comparing MSRP on an XX1 11spd. Honestly, when was the last time something new and moar gear-ish came out that was less than $100 more than it's predecessor? The dentistry business must not be doing too well these days.
Sure. If you take it for granted that the XX1 11 speed stuff was priced reasonably, the 12 speed Eagle seems fine. I don't, which is part of why I'm running XTR on both my trail bikes (one 10 speed, the other 11).
This whole thing is making me laugh but it's honestly true, they are helping more than hurting. Just sayin.
Back to eagle.
maybe where you are, but on my local trails there are just as many ruts from fat bikes. they're just bigger.
granted the real culprit is people riding these trails when they're entirely too soft, at least for the trails by me tire size is irrelevant.
That's exactly the same situation I'm in, had 24-36-bash, dropped the chain too many times despite running various shiftable chain guides. Gave the narrow wide 11-36 hype a chance and stuck to it. The drop in weight was significant too, about 1 lbs.
I don't know that I've dropped a chain since moving to the clutch rear. My front der. cage seems to do a well enough job of keeping the chain over it's intended ring.
I think the biggest problem is that most of us have some nice bikes that rides nice and are not holding us back having fun on the trails. Sure I could run a better front ring that would work better with my suspension and it would give me some more range but not a big enough improvements that I would want to change out my current 11sp setup when I know the real improvement to my ride comes from me riding more and being in better shape.
This just isn't true, physics come into play, and you don't want to fuck with science. Trust me, it is different. Ever cut a stick of butter with a 2x4? Weird huh? Same story w a fatbike in soft dirt...no so deep senior.
Again, now back to eagle. KAW KAW KAW...
You got it. In any conditions a fat tired bike will have less impact than one with skinnier tires.
That said, there are still conditions when even fatbikes should stay the hell off until the trail firms up.
It's just the marketing machine working it's magic. If I was getting a new drivetrain I would be getting this, it makes sense, the wide range rules and I would end up running a 34/36t front ring. I just got some new stuff so it will be a bit before I fly the eagle. I would realistically think we are getting to a point where ppl arent chasing this stuff as must haves. It's simply the incremental tweaks of technology when something plateaus.
Couldn't agree with you more. I didnt want to turn this thread into why I think a fat bike 3 months out of the year in the northeast is good kind of thing. While on the drivetrain convo it is astonishingly crazy how low of gears you need in the snow. To me (and most people) the eagle group is about range. But in weird winter situations that 50 paired up with a 30/32 might actually be needed. The group is cool in lots of ways. It is pretty much and end all solution for everyone (ironically aside from dh). Anyone from a fatbiker/trail/enduro/bikepacker can benefit from this depending on how they setup their bike.
Last edited:
ftfy
Cmon man, you gotta realize the benefit here...I really don't see a downside.
Despite having a wide range, you are still going to spend most of your time in a few gears, that will wear out faster than others. Then you are stuck replacing a larger and more expensive gearset.
So how would you deal with this 'quandary'? Front derailleur? I ride a new 1x XTR setup so I have no horse in the race but I fail to see why people are attacking it so hard?
I'm not exactly opposed to a wider gear range on principle, but like Westy said, I don't want to pay more for bigger, more complicated, heavier gearsets than I need. 11-36 10 speed was fine for me. 11-40 11 speed is really more than enough range. 10-50 is a far huger range than I need for anything.
Granted, I'm not everybody. If some people want a 10-50 spread fine, they can buy it. I'm just speaking to my own needs, which I don't think this meets well at all.
you do realize this type of convo happens every time new stuff comes out...right?
........
I'm with manhattan on this and don't understand the hate. The increased range sounds good to me, as do all the other incremental improvements to what is already a damn good group of parts.
For me there are lots of advantages to 1X, including a cleaner cockpit, better dropper post lever position, consistent suspension/driving force interplay, lighter weight, easier to keep clean, etc., etc.
Now that the range is (arguably) comparable, it's funny to see the 2X holdouts resort to things like chainline and premature wear as arguments against 1X. I've been using XX-1 since it first came out (in what, 2012?) and neither of those have ever been an issue for me. In fact, XX-1 has been the most reliable and durable drivetrain I've ever used. Rock the 2X or 3X if you want, for whatever reason or no reason, but stop trying to justify it on the basis of issues that don't really exist for lots of people in the real world.
If I were building a new bike I'd give this Eagle stuff a shot. But I'm not, and I've got enough 11 spd stuff on hand that I'm choosing e.13's 9-44 cassette to get more range out of XX-1 for a lot less dough. (And for you guys concerned about using only a few cogs on a very expensive cassette, note that the e.13 cassettes come in three pieces and that you can replace one portion without ponying up for a whole new cassette.)
For me there are lots of advantages to 1X, including a cleaner cockpit, better dropper post lever position, consistent suspension/driving force interplay, lighter weight, easier to keep clean, etc., etc.
Now that the range is (arguably) comparable, it's funny to see the 2X holdouts resort to things like chainline and premature wear as arguments against 1X. I've been using XX-1 since it first came out (in what, 2012?) and neither of those have ever been an issue for me. In fact, XX-1 has been the most reliable and durable drivetrain I've ever used. Rock the 2X or 3X if you want, for whatever reason or no reason, but stop trying to justify it on the basis of issues that don't really exist for lots of people in the real world.
If I were building a new bike I'd give this Eagle stuff a shot. But I'm not, and I've got enough 11 spd stuff on hand that I'm choosing e.13's 9-44 cassette to get more range out of XX-1 for a lot less dough. (And for you guys concerned about using only a few cogs on a very expensive cassette, note that the e.13 cassettes come in three pieces and that you can replace one portion without ponying up for a whole new cassette.)
In my experience the main downside to more cassette gears is the decreased reliability and time between maintenance/adjustments that comes with the narrower spacing between cogs.
Reliability deteriorated from 9 to 10 to 11 speed, and going to 12 speed within the same spacing will only make things worse.
I do think XX1 works well, but compared to a 9sp XO setup for example, the shifting quality (while comparable initially) is far more sensitive to small misalignments, cable stretch, cable friction, etc. This is mathematical and inevitable, since you have the same magnitude of all problems over a decreased displacement.
Each time they do this it also causes grief to people happily running older spacing setups since parts availability (especially in the high-end products) take a hit. I've always run 1x on everything but have no desire to decrease my shifting reliability and consistency for some extra range I don't need. No outright hate here, but this is far from an optimal solution.
Reliability deteriorated from 9 to 10 to 11 speed, and going to 12 speed within the same spacing will only make things worse.
I do think XX1 works well, but compared to a 9sp XO setup for example, the shifting quality (while comparable initially) is far more sensitive to small misalignments, cable stretch, cable friction, etc. This is mathematical and inevitable, since you have the same magnitude of all problems over a decreased displacement.
Each time they do this it also causes grief to people happily running older spacing setups since parts availability (especially in the high-end products) take a hit. I've always run 1x on everything but have no desire to decrease my shifting reliability and consistency for some extra range I don't need. No outright hate here, but this is far from an optimal solution.
Exactly. I've been on 1x since 9 speed days, so I'm totally sold on that. I'm not saying that the existence of 12 speed stuff is going to give me Ebola, I was just trying to say that I think the existing 11 speed options already offer more than enough range for my use, so for my use, 12 speed with a wider range is a worse solution. If other people want it, fine. I just don't want tighter range 11 speed stuff to go away because this exists.
I also like Shimano's 11-40 11 speed cassettes better than Sram's 10-42, because I feel like the smaller jumps make it easier to find a cadence I like climbing. It's not a huge deal, but is something I care about to some extent, and going to a wider range for the sake of having a wider range is antithetical to that goal.
I would also challenge any of this reliability nonsense. I have been riding 1x11 this winter through some of the worst imaginable drivetrain conditions. In my experience 'reliability' is a fantasy dreamed up by people who are unwilling to try something new.
Less reliability may or may not be a mathematical inevitability but in any case it's just not my experience in the real world. I was a skeptic in part because I had tons of issues with the reliability and durability of SRAM drivetrains in the past, to the point that I swore off the stuff in favor of Shimano. My experience, however, is that XX-1 is far more reliable than SRAM 9 and 10 spd stuff.
Not arguing here, just relating my experience. And of course, having said this, I'm looking forward to a derailleur explosion on my next ride.
Not arguing here, just relating my experience. And of course, having said this, I'm looking forward to a derailleur explosion on my next ride.
My experience as well. I've been running XX1 since just about when it came out, so around 3 years and it has been flawless from a reliability standpoint. The wear life on the cassette and chain is also insanely good. I am still running my original XX1 cassette and rotate between a couple of chains. Before XX1 came out I felt strongly that XTR was far superior to anything that SRAM had on offer, but XX1 (and X01) changed my mind. I feel like Shimano is back in the game with 11-speed XTR/XT (I'm running a XTR derailleur/shifter/X01 cassette on my trail bike), but they have been playing catch up for a few years. I'm not going to rush out and buy it, but I think the Eagle stuff looks good.
It's just the usual recurring angst about new products combined with the usual vitriol aimed at people who want to try new things and can afford to do so.
1x-whatever isn't for everybody.
Many people still like front derailleurs.
Expensive shit isn't for everybody, but it's also not just for dentists who ride flow trails.
Buy this shit if you like it. Don't buy it if you don't like it.
If someone else's opinion is influencing your enjoyment of your bicycle, perhaps you should rethink your priorities.
Jesus Butt-Fucking Christ, you guys. All of this is okay. Variety and spices and life and all.
Agreed not as deep, but still leaves a rut. Especially in spots where standing water creates mud pits.
They definitely have their place but as jpb pointed out there are conditions that bikes don't belong in period.
Yeah I'm definitely not saying XX1 is bad, it's probably the best trailbike drivetrain on offer.
I'm just saying that tighter spacing between cogs means increased sensitivity to all the things that impede shifting performance (with all else equal). If you actually need the range then sure, let's put 15 gears across a freehub width that was designed for 7 or 8 cogs originally.
But if you don't actually need the range (I don't) then more cogs within a given width = worse. I don't actually think it's a problem until/unless it impedes on availability of older parts and everyone is forced to run 12spd spacing.
I'm just saying that tighter spacing between cogs means increased sensitivity to all the things that impede shifting performance (with all else equal). If you actually need the range then sure, let's put 15 gears across a freehub width that was designed for 7 or 8 cogs originally.
But if you don't actually need the range (I don't) then more cogs within a given width = worse. I don't actually think it's a problem until/unless it impedes on availability of older parts and everyone is forced to run 12spd spacing.
Which is more an argument against their construction method than the 12spd in general. If they were the same price as an XTR cassette, they'd still wear out, but be less painful to replace, but it's not as though XTR is cheap.
To play the devil's advocate, what's your cost per mile to ride a bike with an XX1 cassett vs an XTR? I just wore out the XX1 cassette that came on my bike, and was briefly bummed out at the prospect of buying another $400 cassette, then I thought about how many tires, fork seals, brake pads, fork and shock seals etc I've gone through in the same time-frame. Didn't seem so bad anymore, still doesn't make them cheap, but what sport can you use the best shit that the pros use for cheap?
Time to wait for E13 to come out with their modular 12sp cassette, just like they did with the existing 11sp ones.
waiting for their derailluer.