New XC groupsets rant - are ShRAMano run by retarded marketers?

The new SRAM 2x10 is great, Shimano are up shit creek with a turd for a paddle with their new garbage but seriously i dont know why people are hating on the SRAM 2X10, try it, it is so much better...
 
mcdoned said:
Never forget, the internet is serious business. :)

There's less material in 10spd chains and cassettes (smaller cross-section). Given the prevalence of side loads and dirt and crud, that would suggest that they would wear faster.
Click to expand...

Yes ten speed is narrower and marginally less material in the chain. However ATM SRAM XX are the only manufacturer with a 10spd off road cassette. This has been over machined for the racer set as a selling point, but I imagine when shimano do start producing, the cassettes will be about the same weight as 9spd to keep costs down.

In terms of wear chain skip is primarily a function of the elongation of the chain, which is marginal increased on a 10spd chain.

The issue people have when ever a manufacture releases a groupset with another cog is the increased precision required to cable tension correct so as shifting is perfect. As dirt, mud, sweat etc accumulate on the cables the shifting precision goes out the door. All the people who long for the good old days of 8spd because it just "worked" are talking about the fact any ham-fisted mechanic could set it up because the range of cable tension to get correct shifting was so wide.

9spd + requires greater care and precision with your cables and setup, however the use of full length housing or something like Gore's sealed system eliminate the crup fact as such.

mcdoned said:
I would also imagine that an experienced mechanic might be in a position to have an opinion too, having maintained numerous bikes in addition to his own.

Make sure you say "Hi!" at the next race, you might even get to meet Joel, maybe you can repeat your statements/insults face-to-face. ;)
Click to expand...

I have no problem calling someone a d!ckhead, especially if the are supposed to be an "experienced mechanic" and that is the dribble they're talking ;)
 
tomacropod said:
On paper this all looks really good - but what about when I have to sell a $1200 SLX 10spd mountain bike to a punter who just wants to thrash around and have fun. Do I lie and tell him that his drivetrain is super tough and won't need much maintenance like his old 7spd clunker, or do I tell him that he should ideally clean and lube his chain after every ride, clean his chainrings and cassette after every five rides, and replace his chain every 1000-1500km?l
Click to expand...

how is that any different to a 9spd drive train? Admittedly I probably put mine through more stress then it probably needs to but 1000-1500km is about the life I get out of a 9spd drivetrain... The ultimate maintenance bike might be a single speed with a BMX chain or something. I'm sure you could sell that as a low maintenance jobbie. Besides, with pivots, suspension etc... how is an slx 10spd mountain bike going to *not* be more maintenance than a 7spd clunker. With all due respect, I find this analogy a little dodgy?

tojo said:
lighter weight? yes.
Stronger - i doubt a thinner chain will be stronger
better shifting? - When brand new yes. I'd imagine 10 speed with the closer spacing on the cluster will require a lot more maintenance to avoid problems than a wider spaced cluster would. eg. cables
More usable gears? - There are enough usable gears already. People don't want or need more.
Click to expand...

I think you should get some hard and fast numbers before speculating on strength of the chain. Except when shifting and cross chaining, Almost all of the load of a chain is taken up with the side plates and mostly in tension. While the chain itself is thinner, most of that will be in the actual pins and rollers, the difference of which contribute didly to the strength. I'd be surprised if there's much difference to be honest, but would be happy to be corrected with some hard and fast numbers either way...

Besides, there's more increased strength in that groupset than just the chain. Each generation has been lighter and stronger and this one is no different. Admittedly you could use the same technology and make a kick arse 8speed group set, but not sure you'd want to... the 2x part allows SRAM to use the 1.5x ratio thing in their rings. Can't really do that with a triple. That's what reportedly improves the front shifting.

I for one am craving closer ratios and more gears in a mountain bike. Especially for australian enduro courses which tend to be mostly flat. Maybe I a member of the chi chi carbon wanker crowd but I do find it annoying that the difference between two gears is either side of my comfortable cadence. I think saying people don't want them is a hasty generalisation. how many people go to 2x9 conversions? they're getting pretty popular these days! especially on trail/am bikes etc... and not just the racer set. having the 10 speed cassette allows you to either have closer ratios, or put a bigger bailout cog on the back that you wouldn't otherwise have.

With the exception of Ed and maybe Joel here, Saying you don't "need" more gears is maybe a little hypocritical. if you've ever used your 22:32 (or 22:34 for that matter), then clearly you're using more gears than 8speed already!

More torque through the hub? only if the ratio is lower than what you have already, which it isn't. 24:36 I think is what's the lowest you can get is about the same (or a little taller) than 22:34 so the "need new hubs" call is just flat out furffy.

No offence to anyone, but personally I think the gripes here are more about the "ah crap, my Drive Train is about to become obsolete again..." than any legitimate gripe about the new 10speed system. *maybe* the wear will be worse, time will only tell on that one, but "don't need as many gears, nobody wants it... yadda yadda" well... only 3 people in the world would ever "need" a computer too, and look where that ended up.

I'd say give it a go before trashing the idea without experience or hard facts...

*shrug*

cheers
Spoonie
 
tojo said:
More usable gears? - There are enough usable gears already. People don't want or need more.
Click to expand...

I used gears on the weekend, got so damn confused that I couldn't watch where I was going and tore the sidewall clean out of a brand new tyre! :confused:
 
72Fury said:
Wow !!. Thats a lot of km's. 800km a week average. Out of interest, what sort of hours were you doing ?. What level do you race off road ?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was alot younger , more ambitious, didn't have a young child..yadda yadda yadda
I used to raced high end A Grade, and some of the NRS races.
3-4hr rides during the week and longer on the weekends.
Off-road I'm only a b-grader due to my lack of single track skill.

But this is getting way OT....
 
This thread reminds me a lot of the typical tubeles road discussions. Generally full of people slagging off something they have never used except for small number people who've tried it and reckon it's the next best thing since sliced bread....

I'll try out 10spd sure. In fact the timing is probably going to be right about when I'm due for a new drivetrain. I reckon three likely scenarios.

1. I'll love it
2. I'll hate it, then get used to it and going back to 9sp will feel all weird
3. It'll be different but no better or worse than what we have at the moment
 
bear the bear said:
In terms of wear chain skip is primarily a function of the elongation of the chain, which is marginal increased on a 10spd chain.

The issue people have when ever a manufacture releases a groupset with another cog is the increased precision required to cable tension correct so as shifting is perfect. As dirt, mud, sweat etc accumulate on the cables the shifting precision goes out the door. All the people who long for the good old days of 8spd because it just "worked" are talking about the fact any ham-fisted mechanic could set it up because the range of cable tension to get correct shifting was so wide.

9spd + requires greater care and precision with your cables and setup, however the use of full length housing or something like Gore's sealed system eliminate the crup fact as such.
Click to expand...

Also, if you've ever run a worn chain on single speed cogs, you'll find you can push the stretch far, far further before skipping becomes an issue as the teeth have a larger profile - so if the teeth are smaller and thus burr faster on a narrower cassette, that exacerabates the process of wear in combination with chain elongation.

Cable tension too - given the amount of dust that most mountain bikes see, how often hangers get bent etc.... then yes, it does suggest more maintenance. Do you see how this establishes a physical basis for what Joel was saying on a $1200 first mountain bike? Most first-time buyers would list durability and reliability right up there at that pricepoint.

Craig - XX isn't my issue (or Joel's or the OP's), it's X7 and SLX really. For the race/performance application, it's fine and the points you make are valid, especially about the dual ring. I think your Air9 would be awesome if it had XX. :D But a lot of people aren't cynical enough when starting MTBing to consider that a $1000+ quality bike will be more maintenance than a clunker. Oh yeah, and I spent a lot of time wallowing in my 22/34 in NZ, but don't tell anyone! ;)
 
mcdoned said:
Also, if you've ever run a worn chain on single speed cogs, you'll find you can push the stretch far, far further before skipping becomes an issue as the teeth have a larger profile - so if the teeth are smaller and thus burr faster on a narrower cassette, that exacerabates the process of wear in combination with chain elongation.

Cable tension too - given the amount of dust that most mountain bikes see, how often hangers get bent etc.... then yes, it does suggest more maintenance. Do you see how this establishes a physical basis for what Joel was saying on a $1200 first mountain bike? Most first-time buyers would list durability and reliability right up there at that pricepoint.
Click to expand...

How about we agree SS is a special case for special people ;)
As Spoonie noted and you mention, thicker chain and deeper profiled cogs allow the drivetrain to be pushed well past the point of sensible replacement.

A chain should be replaced well before it starts causing significant wear to a cassette. In fact for best drivetrain life you should have 2-3 chains on rotation.

Whether a narrower chain and cassette will wear quicker....I'm saying no but as mentioned SRAM XX is the only group running 10spd off road ATM. All reports have been good, but it is in somewhat limited numbers.

For the road, and what I strongly disagreed with Joel about is increased wear of 10spd over 9.

At the end of the day 10spd will be rolled out off road and the majority of people will adopt as they replace/ upgrade their bikes as manufacturers phase out 9spd. This has happened with every change dating right back to 7spd.
 
bear the bear said:
A chain should be replaced well before it starts causing significant wear to a cassette. In fact for best drivetrain life you should have 2-3 chains on rotation.
Click to expand...

Slightly OT but I don't agree with that comment at all. I know some people swear by it but in my opinion they are wrong. I don't think it prolongs drivetrain life. Good maintenance & cleaning does - which is probably what occurs when people swap out their chains regularly. So good result for wrong reasons.

Back to the topic at hand - I personally don't have a major problem going to 10 spd on a bike. Necessary? Probably not but whatever I'm not going to lose sleep over it. It's the way of the world. Some developments are just change for change sake and others do some good.

I'll stay 9spd as long as I can cause it'll probably be cheaper now to buy parts. You can still get 9spd road gear so not worried about availability for many years to come. If you don't like 10spd then just change it.

I've got a 10 spd KMC chain waiting to go on my Anthem 9spd drivetrain so I can hardly knock this design decision anyway.
 
bear the bear said:
A chain should be replaced well before it starts causing significant wear to a cassette. In fact for best drivetrain life you should have 2-3 chains on rotation.
Click to expand...

Definitely, I use a chain checker tool on all my bikes so when the chain reaches a certain point it gets replaced. Ultimately it might only get me an extra 40% but changing the whole driverchain is no trivial expense!

My current MTB chain is less then a month old and needs chucking with 1400km's on it!
 
I can't seem to find the original article I read that have prices, but I know they're out there somewhere - what was the pricing on the Shimano 10sp chains? Significantly more than 9sp chains, seeing as it's a double-ramped chain?
 
akashra said:
I can't seem to find the original article I read that have prices, but I know they're out there somewhere - what was the pricing on the Shimano 10sp chains? Significantly more than 9sp chains, seeing as it's a double-ramped chain?
Click to expand...

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/shimano-xt-and-slx-go-10-speed-in-2010-25297

Edit that. 35GBP for an XT chain.

CRC have RRP listed as 30GBP on their HG93.

So, yes more expensive, but realistically SFA.

Edit2: I checked out the other component prices as well. If you are to believe CRC's RRP's the only significantly more expensive part is the crank at +30GBP. Everything else is pretty much the same.
 
Last edited:
I'll avoid having to have an opinion on this matter but instead, decide on what rear cog i'll run on my SS, so that I can climb all the hills at wisemans.

Its an easy choice IMO: 18T
 
DaGonz said:
...
I for one am craving closer ratios and more gears in a mountain bike. Especially for australian enduro courses which tend to be mostly flat. Maybe I a member of the chi chi carbon wanker crowd but I do find it annoying that the difference between two gears is either side of my comfortable cadence. I think saying people don't want them is a hasty generalisation. how many people go to 2x9 conversions? they're getting pretty popular these days! especially on trail/am bikes etc... and not just the racer set. having the 10 speed cassette allows you to either have closer ratios, or put a bigger bailout cog on the back that you wouldn't otherwise have.
Click to expand...
A flat enduro course? Maybe I should ask what you mean by enduro but I have to say none of the enduros I've done are flat. By enduro I mean 50/100km, The Fling, DW100, Mogo are not flat. I'm actually heading down to Wingello this Saturday for a ride over some of the Fling course and other trails - plenty of little hills and big ones too. Remember the Wall? Nowra's MTB101 and the Husky Enduro are fairly flat but the majority aren't. I haven't done the Otway but they tell me it isn't flat either!

As for 2 x 9 conversions I have to laugh, we have one guy who has done it - we wait at the top of the hills for him now but not when we are on road bikes. He sounds like he regrets it now, well at least when we go on the hillier rides. It seems to go suit fine in the RNP where it isn't really that hilly. I'm not sure what he has but I think it is a 39/26 so with a 26 x 36 it's like a 22 x 30.5. For elite guys I think it definitely has a place, that is 2 x 10 or 2 x 9 when you are very strong you just don't need the lower ratios but even for a better than average rider I think you are still better off with a triple.

With the exception of Ed and maybe Joel here, Saying you don't "need" more gears is maybe a little hypocritical. if you've ever used your 22:32 (or 22:34 for that matter), then clearly you're using more gears than 8speed already!

More torque through the hub? only if the ratio is lower than what you have already, which it isn't. 24:36 I think is what's the lowest you can get is about the same (or a little taller) than 22:34 so the "need new hubs" call is just flat out furffy.

No offence to anyone, but personally I think the gripes here are more about the "ah crap, my Drive Train is about to become obsolete again..." than any legitimate gripe about the new 10speed system. *maybe* the wear will be worse, time will only tell on that one, but "don't need as many gears, nobody wants it... yadda yadda" well... only 3 people in the world would ever "need" a computer too, and look where that ended up.

I'd say give it a go before trashing the idea without experience or hard facts...

*shrug*

cheers
Spoonie
Click to expand...
I'm happy to wait and see how the market reacts but I see this as a small refinement. When I go to 10spd I'll still be going 3 x 10 thanks - I'll gladly pay the weight penalty. With narrower 10spd chains the triples rings can also be slightly closer which might provide a slight improvement in front shifting especially when combined with the closer range up front of 42/32/24 as opposed to 44/32/22. I think a slightly bigger small ring of 24 helps reduce chain suck too - you hardly ever get chain suck when in the middle ring (32) so I'm supposing a slight reduction though mostly it just seems to be some cranks more than others.

For a slight refinement like this the cost vs the benefit of upgrading will never add up in my book, probably better buying a new bike with it on it.
 
Woohoo, Shimano 1x10 gears

I'm just looking forward to a Shimano 11-36t 10spd cassette and a Shimano 10spd shifter/derailuer/chain, so I can combine it with a 28t Wigit and cover granny gear climbs, then up to 30kmh singletrack speed.

I don't care about chain, cassette or chainring wear.....I will just replace the chain a little more often.

Blows a rasberry @ the world................
 
Slowman said:
A flat enduro course? Maybe I should ask what you mean by enduro but I have to say none of the enduros I've done are flat. By enduro I mean 50/100km, The Fling, DW100, Mogo are not flat.
Click to expand...

Enduros are events run around in circles mostly and are time based. 4,8,12,24 etc...

Marathons are event run as a point to point mostly and are distanced based. 50,100,160,360kms etc...

Cheers
Spoonie
 
Slowman said:
As for 2 x 9 conversions I have to laugh, we have one guy who has done it - we wait at the top of the hills for him now but not when we are on road bikes. He sounds like he regrets it now, well at least when we go on the hillier rides. It seems to go suit fine in the RNP where it isn't really that hilly. I'm not sure what he has but I think it is a 39/26 so with a 26 x 36 it's like a 22 x 30.5. For elite guys I think it definitely has a place, that is 2 x 10 or 2 x 9 when you are very strong you just don't need the lower ratios but even for a better than average rider I think you are still better off with a triple.
Click to expand...

triple fronts, imho, are unnecessary for most serious riders. fair enough if you ride a 14kg freeride/all mountain bike or if you only ride sundays or you don't have the knees left to put power down, but the average rider who can reasonably complete a marathon doesn't really need anything below 29:32 - that's like 5km/h by which point you may as well start walking or click down and actually put some effort in. try it, i'd say you'll be surprised by how little you need granny...

personally, I'm hanging out for my 1x9 on my 29er. 44t up front and 11-32 out back...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top