Quantcast

Shimano DRD derailleur mounting standard - thoughts?

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist: “I Brake for Birds”
Mar 14, 2005
4,773
924
http://www.nsmb.com/5213-vid-shimano-drd-derailleur-standard



Just saw this, not sure if it has already been discussed here. I'm a fan of Shimano products in general, however my first thought was 'they just solved a problem that they created themselves'.

In their original shadow implementation they basically tried to lock out the existing pivot at the derailleur mount, and make a new one further back - problem was that it still moved every now and then, especially if it took a hit. This solution removes the existing pivot to solve that problem.

This standard definitely won't benefit SRAM unless they change their design entirely to line up with Shimano's... however it does benefit Shimano, and looks like it will make it easier to get your wheel in and out. But is that really worth another new standard?
 

Vrock

Linkage Design Blog
Aug 13, 2005
263
35
Spain
It's just a Hanger, for 30$ you still can buy another one for classic Derailleurs.
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist: “I Brake for Birds”
Mar 14, 2005
4,773
924
I realise that, was more interested in hearing whether other people liked or disliked their current implementation with the additional 'link'.
 

dilzy

Monkey
Sep 7, 2008
567
1
I think it's a great idea, principally because at least in Australia, that stupid b-pivot link on your $250 xtr/saint/xt derailleur couldn't be purchased when you bent it, so removing it is a great idea.

I think it's one less pivot to make noise and wear out and for some reason I am a special brand of retard who has trouble getting my derailleur out of the way to put my wheels in, so I'm all for it.
 

Deano

Monkey
Feb 14, 2011
233
0
i think its a good solution.

its one of the few points on frames that still use the "whoops" solutions of old.
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist: “I Brake for Birds”
Mar 14, 2005
4,773
924
Yeah I didn't like that link either, found it moved when it shouldn't and made the mech bang against the frame - suppose as long as enough bike companies offer compatible hangers the new setup will be good.
 

al-irl

Turbo Monkey
Dec 9, 2004
1,087
0
A, A
i like the sound of the benefits of it, however there is already enough standards changing which makes it harder for an lbs to have the right spares for you instock when you walk in. If there was a standard for how it mounted to the frame id be more interested. As that would cut down on the amount of different mech hangers that were needed.
 

4130biker

PM me about Tantrum Cycles!
May 24, 2007
3,904
442
Lizard Town
I'm not a big "new standard" fan, but IF SRAM jumps on the shadow bandwagon, it could be a good thing for everyone. More clearance, plus IMO (if I'm seeing it right) a stronger clevis style interface with the hanger.

PB said it gives brands the option to go with a new thicker non replaceable hanger, but thats bs because bikes as old as the first gen bullit had that.
 
Last edited:

the law

Monkey
Jun 25, 2002
267
0
where its at
I don't like the idea that a frame may only be compatible with Shimano. I prefer SRAM's triggers and it would suck if I could not buy a frame because it is not compatible. Hopefully there are no patents involved and SRAM is able to make a compatible derailleur.

In the end, the derailleur hanger is still probably going to be replaceable with two derailleur hanger options, one for SRAM and one for Shimano. At least that's what it looks IBIS will be offering.