Quantcast

Sram XX1

daisycutter

Turbo Monkey
Apr 8, 2006
1,651
124
New York City
It looks like it will work great for cross country applications. In four years we go from 3 front rings to one. Man that rear cassete is huge.
 

trib

not worthy of a Rux.
Jun 22, 2009
1,458
388
huge cassettes and long arm derailleurs don't matter so much with 29" wheels as there's that little extra ground clearance.

Quite happy to see the fd hit the parts bin.
 

woodsguy

gets infinity MPG
Mar 18, 2007
1,083
1
Sutton, MA
I find that a 32 ring with a 11-34 cassette is good for 99.9% of my riding. I so seldom use the little ring that it is still original from when my bike was new in 2005. I've replaced the middle ring about 4 times and its due for another. I'm thinking of going 1x9 or 1x10 with 32 ring and a 11-36 cassette.
 

dump

Turbo Monkey
Oct 12, 2001
8,195
4,419
Seems like quite a bit more gear range than I'd want.
 

mattmatt86

Turbo Monkey
Feb 9, 2005
5,347
10
Bleedmore, Murderland
I've been running 1x9 with a 34t and 11-34 cassette for over 3 years and I've yet to find a hill I couldn't climb. Regardless, I think it's pretty rad and I'd love to give it a try.
 

manhattanprjkt83

Rusty Trombone
Jul 10, 2003
9,644
1,214
Nilbog
Seems like quite a bit more gear range than I'd want.
I am 100% with you dump. Really cool that they are pushing the envelope here with this set but I am not positive it's for me at this point. I am running a 1x9 right now with a 34t big guy in the back. On some really tough days i run out of range and really wish for more. I have had my sights on an XTR clutch setup w/ a 36 in the back which should help me out quite a bit...

No hate for the group but that is a huge pie plate on the back and im not sure i want to replace every aspect of my drivetrain.
 

dilzy

Monkey
Sep 7, 2008
567
1
Same boat as mattmatt86, I've been running 11-34 (9speed) cassette with 32t front and e13 guide and it's perfect. Never found the need to be pedalling past what the 32 allows.

I don't understand how people still think you need two front chain rings when 11speed goes 11-36 ffs.
 

norbar

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause
Jun 7, 2007
11,346
1,587
Warsaw :/
I find that a 32 ring with a 11-34 cassette is good for 99.9% of my riding. I so seldom use the little ring that it is still original from when my bike was new in 2005. I've replaced the middle ring about 4 times and its due for another. I'm thinking of going 1x9 or 1x10 with 32 ring and a 11-36 cassette.
Since I live in the flats and the trailbike is my training bike I make big distances with 32x11 is not a good ratio. If it is only for the hills yes it makes sense but if you really want a do it all ratio what I see here makes sense.
 

rayhaan

Monkey
Oct 18, 2007
522
0
ireland
On my most recent bike build, I opted for an 11-34, 10 speed cassette with a 34 tooth chainring, and all the hills, trails, flats, whatever I have ridden in the past with a 9 speed, 11-34 cassette with a 32 tooth chainring up front are no different.

I honestly don't see the point of this 11 speed, with the ratios they are offering you'll be able to climb a wall with them. 11 speed on roadbikes is overkill, and 11 speed on mountainbikes is just bananas. In my opinion it is typical SRAM marketing hype. But I have always been a Shimano guy anyway...
 

norbar

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause
Jun 7, 2007
11,346
1,587
Warsaw :/
On my most recent bike build, I opted for an 11-34, 10 speed cassette with a 34 tooth chainring, and all the hills, trails, flats, whatever I have ridden in the past with a 9 speed, 11-34 cassette with a 32 tooth chainring up front are no different.

I honestly don't see the point of this 11 speed, with the ratios they are offering you'll be able to climb a wall with them. 11 speed on roadbikes is overkill, and 11 speed on mountainbikes is just bananas. In my opinion it is typical SRAM marketing hype. But I have always been a Shimano guy anyway...
When you need to cover ground on flat, hard surface to for example get back from a long trip 34:11 is not really a high gear
 

rayhaan

Monkey
Oct 18, 2007
522
0
ireland
When you need to cover ground on flat, hard surface to for example get back from a long trip 34:11 is not really a high gear
34:11 ain't that bad when you consider a roadbike in the small ring is a 39:11, or if it has a compact chainset then you are running a 34:11.

I cycle back from the hills here and it would be at least 26km to get home on the road, the 34:11 has served me just fine, just have to spin more...
 

Ithnu

Monkey
Jul 16, 2007
961
0
Denver
Same boat as mattmatt86, I've been running 11-34 (9speed) cassette with 32t front and e13 guide and it's perfect. Never found the need to be pedalling past what the 32 allows.

I don't understand how people still think you need two front chain rings when 11speed goes 11-36 ffs.
I had been toying with the 1x9 with a 11-34 ring last year. But in the Colorado Front Range there are more than a few climbs that when I switch to a 22t small ring I say "oh thank god" out loud. I immediately think of one in particular that is 1,500' vert in 2.5 miles. I do have one friend who loves his 1x9. I have another friend who is actually faster uphill than all but CAT 1 XC racers who says "fu#k that, sometimes I spin fast".

I switched to a 29er this year and left the gearing the same. Kinda cool because it increased my minimum climbing speed but earlier this year I couldn't make climbs I could on my 26" HT. So that 22t is staying on the bike.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,031
5,921
borcester rhymes
I'll keep my 2x9, better spacing and better range. The more I ride, the more I find use for very low and very high gears. Then again, I think XC with a 66* HA is idiotic, so I'm certainly the minority on this forum. I think a 24/36 up front with an 11-34 would be my ideal....or even something like an 11-32. Hell, part of the problem is cross chaining. I can only imagine how fast a small cog will wear with a tiny 11spd chain and high angular forces. Or even the big ring trying to crank up something really steep. Yikes.
 

dropmachine

Turbo Monkey
Sep 7, 2001
2,922
10
Your face.
XC with a 66* HA can be quite fun actually, if thats your riding style. All depends on who you are, ya know?

This XX1 stuff is definitely curious.


On one hand, that giant cog would be great for when you're just dead, and have to make it up there. Just sit, spin lazily and eventually you'll get there.

On the other, its odd since the XX group is targeted towards superhuman-lung hill climbers, who I think rarely get to the point of needing the bail out gear.
 

OGRipper

back alley ripper
Feb 3, 2004
10,647
1,116
NORCAL is the hizzle
Regional differences in terrain, relative fitness/capacity for suffering, and personal opinion are all at play here. This will work for some, others will give a hearty "meh".

Personally, I like a wider range. 2X10 barely covers it.
 

mtg

Green with Envy
Sep 21, 2009
1,862
1,604
Denver, CO
I agree with Ithnu and Sandwich. Well, except I do wish the 67 deg. HA on my trail bike was moar slack sometimes.

In Colorado, there are plenty of people that climb the hills on single speeds and 1x, but to actually keep a decent cadence, anybody below Lance Armstrong needs some low gearing. I don't like front shifting, but I don't envision myself switching to 1x11.

I'm currently running 2x9 on my trail bike with 22/36 up front and 11-34 out back and regularly use the lowest gear while climbing.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,031
5,921
borcester rhymes
I can see the drive to accumulate all shifter mechanisms into one system, but I just don't know if this is the right way to do it. I would much rather see an internal overdrive mechanism that gives you two speeds in the rear with 8 cogs on top (Sturmey with gears?). Or, a lightened and tightened hammershifpdt. And overlap is not a bad thing. It allows you larger spread without HAVING to shift your front chainring. You can get both a huge cranking speed and a tiny granny gear while still being able to get out of most anything, especially with a wide-ass 11-34.

I know it's different strokes for folks but it would be OK if they applied some of this fantastic technology to all drivetrains. I want to try out a clutch derailleur but I'm not switching to ten speed, not after watching somebody break a chain on a three day old bike. I have enough problems with 9 speeds popping and chain wear issues that I don't need it any worse.
 

kazlx

Patches O'Houlihan
Aug 7, 2006
6,985
1,957
Tustin, CA
I like the idea, but it will be all about execution. I have a 32/11-34 on my hard tail and if I don't ride for a while, it kicks my butt. It's fine for long, mellow climbs, but sucks for steeper ones. I'd like to try it out since I love not having a front derailleur, but the ticket price is a little steep.
 

Tetreault

Monkey
Nov 23, 2005
877
0
SoMeWhErE NoWhErE
who cares, different required freehub body means more compatibility issues and more upfront costs to consumers to pay for the R&D, they can frankly go **** themselves from my perspective as i was always ok with 2x9 and 1x10 or 2x10 is more then enough now
 

norbar

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause
Jun 7, 2007
11,346
1,587
Warsaw :/
I understand the anger in new standards that are forced on people - new hub,bb sizes for example because buying a frame means buying new parts but here no one forces you to buy new parts. You can wait until your parts are dead and you can find 11 speed for a better price.
So why be angry on something that some people find useful?
 

samnation

Monkey
Jan 25, 2009
139
0
Somewhere in KANURDUR
The best part of this is that the Sram derailleurs all bend in the same spot with this only moving on one axis that won't matter anymore.

But in all seriousness it will make sense for some and not for others.
 

norbar

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause
Jun 7, 2007
11,346
1,587
Warsaw :/
The plan is to design and sell stuff that is stupid expensive, proprietary and fragile to keep people buying.
I think the case is just big companies being conservative and investing in safe things. If the gearbox niche grows to a sensible size they will jump on that trend faster than you can say conspiracy theory.
 

Tetreault

Monkey
Nov 23, 2005
877
0
SoMeWhErE NoWhErE
I think the case is just big companies being conservative and investing in safe things. If the gearbox niche grows to a sensible size they will jump on that trend faster than you can say conspiracy theory.
Gear boxes are not a trend, and sram is pissing me off by being excessive with the XX and now XX1 lines, these are not conservative developments by any means.

Last year SRAM did put out a job opening looking for a gearbox engineer, so maybe something is coming through the pipeline.
This is true, if they did in fact find someone and started development, we are at least another year or two away from seeing anything from them, but hopefully it is on the horizon.