SRAM XX1 Drivetrain - First Look

May 25, 2012
by Mike Levy  
 
You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login

This morning saw SRAM issue a short press release alluding to a new group titled XX1, a name signifying that it will sit atop their component range alongside the current XX group. While very little information was actually divulged, they do make it clear that it is an entire group based around a single-ring setup (hence the ''1'' designation) that has been engineered for enduro and all-mountain use, as well as being compatible with both Grip Shift and their trigger shifters. The words from SRAM are rather brief, but there are a few points that piqued our interest, notably the mention of an extremely wide range cassette and their use of ''Innovative chain management technology...'' that works with the recently released Type 2 rear derailleurs.


Why A Single Ring?

A single chain ring setup is often the ticket for fit riders who can push the taller easy gear up their local climbs, or for those who spend time on flatter terrain, but making the switch to one chain ring can be an intimidating change for mountain bikers who don't feel they are in good enough shape to get by without a bailout gear. That may change in the near future with SRAM's announcement of its wide-range, single-ring drivetrain that could have more riders considering going the single ring route. Why would a single ring make sense if it offers a more limited gearing range compared to a two-chain ring system? Given the narrow ranges that present one-by drivetrains offer, there are riders who need more gears, and terrain where a single ring is never going to be ideal, but the system's simplicity, often lighter overall weight, and the very fact that there isn't a bailout gear are the selling features for riders who are willing to push themselves.

Devinci's Gabe Fox agrees, telling Pinkbike ''I think the new XX1 address all of the needs of the Enduro rider, it takes some modifications which the top riders have been doing for years and expands on them, creating a well-thought-out, discipline-specific setup. XX1 will really benefit this category." Fox hits the nail on the head, noting that XX1 is likely going to be a tool for a very distinct type of rider who can get the most from the setup.


Since the introduction of 2 x 10 we've always offered choices, that's been clear from our gearing options. We're not here to change standards, we're here to innovate. Innovation comes from within SRAM and our global athletes, something that has been made apparent as we continue to sweep the podium at World Cup cross-country events and in the enduro scene. But by no means is this a replacement for 2 x 10, a system that makes the most sense for the majority of people.
- Tyler Morland, MTB PR Manager

That said, there are compelling reasons for a one-by drivetrain in the rapidly-expanding 29er marketplace as well. With the tire and front derailleur competing for the same space in the rear of the frame, bike designers would love to eliminate it entirely. A single-ring drivetrain would allow for shorter chainstays and wider tires without compromising mud clearance or the chainline. But the single-chain ring drivetrain will not gain traction in the wider market unless it can offer a gearing spread that is at least comparable to existing two-by-ten drivetrains like SRAM's XX.




SRAM XX1 on bike
  SRAM's XX1 group bolted to Jerome Clementz's Cannondale Jekyll. Take note of the size of the largest rear cog compared to the bike's chain ring, as well as the complete lack of a chain guide.

11 Speed Cassette

SRAM's boasting of their XX1 group having the widest gearing range available has us believing that the new group will utilize an 11 speed cassette - a fact that is backed up in the photos shown here - confirming rumors that have been circulating within the industry for months. The reasoning behind this is that the gear ratio jumps from cog to cog are close to ideal on the current two-by drivetrains using 11-36, ten-speed cassettes. To match that spread with a single chain ring, SRAM's drivetrain engineers would need to increase the number of teeth on the largest cassette cog and also reduce the number of teeth on the smallest cog. To do so and remain within the confines of a ten-cog cassette, however, would create larger jumps between gears. Presently, the ideal jump from cog to cog has been established at 13 percent - which has been proven successfully in competition and the trail. This knowledge explains why SRAM added an eleventh cog to the cassette - a production first in the mountain bike world. (Although 11-speed has been available on the road for a while now.)


So, what sort of cassette gearing would be required of an 11-speed cassette to create a range that approaches that of their current 2 x 10 setup? Two important facts have to be kept in mind when predicting what the range will be: first, the XX moniker designates the group's race ready intentions, meaning that it likely won't be geared for casual riders who don't get out often. While XX components are certainly used on bikes that never see a race course, they are intended for fit riders who push themselves. It is for this reason that we don't expect XX1 to offer anything close to granny gear type numbers. Second, many full suspension bikes are designed so that their suspension functions best when their chain is close to where it would be when on a middle chain ring sized ring. With that in mind we expect it to use a ring that is at least as close in size to a standard 32-tooth ring, meaning that the XX1 cassette will likely feature a much larger spread than anything we might anticipate at first in order to compensate.

SRAM would not tell us exactly what the gearing options will be for XX1, but with a little sleuthing and a calculator, we can say with a level of certainty that the small cassette cog will be a 10-tooth (or even smaller), while the larger one will be either a 41 or 42-tooth sprocket. Why? If SRAM's claim that X1 has the widest gearing range available holds true, then the absolute minimum spread between the large and small cassette cogs would have to be 10 by 41 teeth. We counted the chain ring teeth on Jerome Clementz's Cannondale Jekyll shown above and guessed it could be a 32 (a figure that matches the smallest big-ring available for its X0 crankset). If one compares the gearing spread of a 39 by 26 two-ring crankset using an 11 by 36 cassette, we arrive at a 3.54:1 high gear and a 0.72:1 low gear. Our theoretical SRAM XX1 32-tooth single-ring crankset driving a 10 by 42 cassette gives a similar spread, with a slightly lower, 3.2:1 high gear and a slightly taller, 0.76:1 low gear. The cassette in the pictures leads us to believe that SRAM chose a 42 tooth large cog, because a 13% jump from the existing 36-tooth cog would be 41.5, thus a 42-tooth cog would make more sense. The smallest cog in the cassette depicted appears larger than the nine-tooth sprockets we have seen on Hope and Shimano-hybrid cassettes, so our bet is ten teeth there.

Technically, there is room to add an eleventh cog on the large end of the existing SRAM cassette without requiring a special freehub body because the angle of the drive-side spokes makes room for it there. A close look at the rear-view of the cassette seems to reveal the lack of an external lock ring – a necessity which could allow the cassette to be shifted a few millimeters to the right without causing clearance issues with the frame. The design of the cassette suggests that the 42-tooth sprocket is pinned to the adjoining cog. We are curious to see if SRAM will introduce a narrower 11-speed chain, although it is doubtful as the prototype XX1 system has been in use for some time and developing a new chain would require a huge commitment. Hopefully, their existing ten-speed chain will be compatible.


It's great to see advancements in the sport of cycling, especially the ones that make the ride more enjoyable. A single ring setup may start out a little daunting, but for the right experience and done properly, it's the ticket! In the case of enduro riding, the terrain and speeds can get pretty insane and the less I have to worry about my bike and my equipment the better. The two scenarios that really pop out at me are smashing over things like rocks and logs, my buddy that crashed right in front of me, and getting on the gas out of corners. For those two, the extra clearance of a single ring and the fact, that chain retention is far improved, means I can get over more obstacles without hitting it (good news), and I don't worry about throwing in some hard pedal strokes when the chain is not on (if you have plowed your own top tube, you know what I am talking about). Not to mention that it's lighter and the handlebar cockpit is cleaned up.
- Sam Benedict, Specialized MTB Product Marketing

One Chain Ring, But A Wider Gearing Range

Again, it is important to keep in mind that XX1 is clearly going to be aimed at riders who are fit enough that they may be already considering going to a single ring setup. If XX1 does combine a 32-tooth ring with a 10 - 42 tooth cassette, it will actually include a lower low gear and a higher high gear than any current single-ring setup: a 32-tooth ring and 36-tooth cog gives a gear development of 74.6'', while a 32/42 combo offers a lower 62.4'' development. At the other end of the spectrum you'll find that a standard 32/11 allows for a 244.3'' development, compared to a 268.7'' development from a 32/10 high gear (note the graphic above). If you fell asleep reading all those numbers, then all you need to remember is that a single-chainring crank driving an 11-speed cassette with a 10 by 42 tooth range has a similar gear selection than present 2 by 10 drivetrains. That is certainly a wide enough range for a fit rider to make do with.




New Rear Derailleur

A new 11 speed cassette will also require an entirely new rear derailleur design, one that employs different geometry from what is currently used. A prototype version of the derailleur can be seen at right, and it's clear that it is quite different from the 10 speed derailleurs available now. The most obvious difference is the pully wheel that the shift cable rides on before being clamped in place on the actuation arm. The cable clamp point is also now under the front side of the parallelogram, as opposed to tucked behind as found on the current design. You can also make out the Cage Lock button just below the derailleur's knuckle, signifying that the prototype also uses SRAM's one-way roller clutch system that applies friction in the forward swinging motion of the derailleur's cage while letting it pivot backwards easily. This adds tension to the chain to keep excess slap to a minimum in order to improve shift consistency, lessen the chance of dropping a chain, and greatly quiet noise from chain slap.

Don't expect the current 10 speed shifters or derailleurs to be compatible with any of the new 11 speed components, although SRAM has stated that the new and yet to be named derailleur can be controlled with either Grip Shift and trigger shifters, meaning that we can expect to see 11 speed versions of both in the future.




Modified Chain Ring Teeth

When you think about a single chain ring setup you surely also picture a chain guide in the picture, be it either a lightweight or full-on guide, to help keep the chain in place. But what if a layout could be used that managed to keep the chain on the ring without requiring a guide? Not using a guide would eliminate chain rub and complication from the equation, not to mention the added weight the comes along with bolting a chain guide to the bike. SRAM's new Type 2 rear derailleur increases chain tension, a step that goes a long way to keeping the chain on over rough terrain, but we believe that XX1 goes a step further than that.

The photo to the right shows a prototype XX1 chain ring that, if you look closely, sports some very different looking teeth. This, we believe, is what SRAM is referring to when they mention ''Innovative chain management technology...''. It looks as if SRAM has approached the challenge of chain retention right at the heart of the matter, by designing chain ring teeth that help to hold the chain in place. Shaping the chain ring teeth is nothing new - inspect the rings on a two or three chain ring crankset and you'll notice how some of the teeth are actually shorter than others, as well as pins and shaping just below the teeth, details that are all there to encourage the chain to move from one ring to the next as fast as possible. SRAM has likely done just the opposite with the XX1 chain ring, although it remains to be seen if the design can be as effective as a lightweight upper slider-only type guide. We still expect to see a lightweight guide intended to work with the new XX1 group, though, regardless of the clever tooth shaping.


Pinkbike's take:
bigquotesWe are big believers in single chain ring setups, with many of our personal bikes sporting 10 speed cassettes combined with a single 32 tooth ring. We've found that this setup works quite well, despite our rather steep and hilly local terrain, but we do admit that there are situations where it is far from ideal. The issue boils down to gearing range, or rather the lack of it, during those early season rides when we're far from being fit. It isn't just the lack of low range, though, but also those times when we find ourselves wishing for a bigger gear. And that's what has us so excited about XX1, with its wider gearing range that will allow more riders to take advantage off running a single chain ring setup. Having said that, we're sure that SRAM is fully aware that there will be resistance to a new 11 speed component group, even if it might make sense from a performance point of view. The current 10 speed systems are not going to disappear anytime soon - 2 x 10 makes more sense for many riders - but think of XX1 as an option that could suit certain riders and conditions. The bottom line is that 10 speed isn't going anywhere anytime soon. XX1 will be an option that will work for some riders in some places. The math proves that it can be used to create a simpler drivetrain that actually has a wider gear spread than some double ring combos. Now we just need to ride it. - Mike levy

www.sram.com

309 Comments

  • + 27
 Love the idea.

The bigger ratio is great, although I am not sure on the 11 speed thing.
At the moment it would require an all new setup, new chainrings, chain, derailleur etc.
Its logical that Sram aims for this right now, after all for high end you need to be exclusive and in the future will offer the bigger ratio cogs for 10 speed too...

I'm riding the Kona Honzo 1*9 29'' bike with crazy short chainstays, and it really makes sense to ditch the FD, especially on 29^-ers
  • + 63
 I rock 1 x 8 and have never wished for 3 more cogs.
  • + 19
 im running 1x10 and thats too much i think, 11 or more would just be silly!
  • + 33
 For me 2 x 9 and nothing to coplain
  • + 9
 Have both 1x10 on 6" Am bike and 1x9 on a hardtail - can uphill anything on either of them, from steep tech climbs on rocks and roots to 2h fireroad ascents. 32t x 11-34 and run out of gears very rarely only on asphalt on the way to/from woods. Drivetrain is not all there is to climbing...
  • + 61
 This is getting silly now
  • + 11
 Sometimes it's nicer to not worry about the gears so much. More options means more to think about too. Sometimes you just have to say, fuck it, and ride. whatever...as long as they don't make it impossible to replace and upgrade parts without having to get a new drive-train entirely, I won't get mad.
  • + 4
 22, 34 / 11 - 32 suits me fine.
  • + 5
 My hardtail is 1x9. 36T front chainring does make it hard. And that may go down to a 32 once I'm back at home from uni as the hills are bigger at home. However i'll probs just be using my Jekyll for all off road rides.
The Jekyll comes with SRAM 3x10 which is an INSANE number of gears. For a bike such as the Jekyll I do not understand why they didn't just bin the biggest ring and perhaps put a bashguard on it. There'd be very little if any extra cost and it actually makes sense.

3x10 cranksets are excessive! If you think 2x9/10 isn't enough get a smaller granny ring and/or a bigger 'middle' ring. OR MTFU and go 1x10 Big Grin
  • - 5
 How about instead of going to eleven - reduce the chainring to 30 or 28?. Not ideal by any means for DH, but very logical for AM.
  • + 10
 I know a logical solution to problems with current drivetrain setups on XC/trail and AM bikes: I'll list it with weights:

1.James Wilsons training program (10mb),
2.kettlebells 12 and 16kg ,
3.50kg of wieghts for two dumbbells, (might need 30 more for deadlifts) so a bar could come handy.
4.A jumping rope (120g)
5.Yoga matt 80x200cm (800g)
6.Chin up bar (1,5kg)

Works awesome!
  • + 44
 Don't buy upgrades..ride up grades
  • - 10
 And how many "haters" here are even serious about racing Enduro, which this is clearly targeted at, to even have a voice that counts?

Are you "haters" just reasoning yourself to prevent the poser in you from wanting to spend money, so you can be like the guys you look up to in the PODs and VODs? They're only offering a new option with some innovation and I see nothing wrong with that. I'm not buying it, since I'm not an Enduro racer and know of many better ways to use my money.

The Pinkbike community seems to be...
  • + 2
 Maybe many are just plain fit and skilled to ride what they have for where they ride. "haters" are wolves that thin out the herd and seek the weak. You need 'em to exist. What's so hateful about a less is more approach?
  • + 5
 i'm riding 1x7 and it's awesome. i would switch to this, but it's too many gears to worry about. and probably really costly.
  • + 2
 Varaxis. who's the "hater"? everyones expressing their opinions on this new technology. Didn't we JUST have 10spd shoved down our throats. It shouldn't have been mainstream, and definetly not found on DH bikes. But it is.

How many guys do you know that actually race enduro? does Ross Schnell or Rene Wildhaber continually complain 'oh i wish i had one more even easier gear to make my enduro DH life easier, wah wah wahh!!' I doubt it... because like Waki said. just go the the gym. haha
  • + 3
 It's pitiful when white boys from privileged backgrounds try to sound "urban" and hip by using the slang of a different culture ("hater").

Offering critical analysis of something isn't "hating." I suggest you go get a dictionary and look up "hate." No, not the Urban Dictionary.
  • + 2
 This place is turning worse than what I've seen with roadies on Bike Rumor, unable to get a bunch of comments that reek of self centered, ignorant, snobby opinions. The haters are the ones that refuse to see any possible good and reinforce their stance by saying things like "10 spd shoved down our throats" and other worthless points.

How about I become a hater to understand them better... what good would it do me to know about Ross Schnell, Rene Wildhaber, or other Enduro racers, and if I weren't a manufacturer who sponsored them, or made parts that they may or may not be using, and asked for feedback on what I could do to improve drivetrains to help them win, how would I know if they aren't asking for easier "enduro DH life"?

If I listened to the whining of the haters on Pinkbike, I might be led to think that SRAM isn't going to make any money off of this. Back to hater mode, I may wonder how that affects me. Hmm, they're not making the DH stuff any "better" and I'm feeling neglected? I have to waste time sitting on pinkbike filtering through more of their "marketing" rather than getting to the rad stuff that makes me feel better for not being outside riding?
  • + 7
 Remember when you was 12, arguing with friends who had the best bike based on who had the most gears? Well this is the modern day version lmao.

But seriously if you don't like it don't buy it. Hopefully when they sell zero units sram + shimano might drop the idea of "more is better" and give us something we actually want.

Or maybe some other company should step in? give sram and shimano the finger by developing something useful and not based on hype. It seems the market is ready for it?

PS. 1x9 rider Smile
  • + 9
 If you think your current gearing range is perfect for where you ride, this has no reflection on what will work for everyone, everywhere else. The gears that work well enough to get by at home in Squamish absolutely smashed me in Alberta. If I was to move there, I would very unfortunately need a front mech again if not for this new system. No thanks.

I was getting by ok with a 1x9 (32T + 11-34) at home but I had no top end at all which was annoying, so I welcomed the extra range of a 1x10 (33T + 11x36) but it's still not quite satisfactory. I need more at both ends, as the climbing is tough on long rides when I get tired, and I still spin out too easily. It's very close but not quite there, so I can't see needing a 10-42. I'd be quite happy to run my 33T ring with a 10T cog for top end, and would probably be happy with a 38T big cog.

Everyone is on about wanting to see the death of the rear derailluer. I think the front is a much weaker link in the smooth running and simplicity of a drivetrain (not from a 'safe from harm' perspective). I hate dealing with the POS front mech on my wife's bike that she constantly complains about with noise, mis-shifts and dropped chains, not to mention that VPP feels like crap in a granny gear. I know what you're thinking... I can't setup a front mech properly. Well I used to be a bike mechanic and they have always sucked. Maybe they are better now than the 5 year old stuff on my wife's bike but the last thing I feel like doing when I go over her bike is messing with the front mech and then going and testing the thing to see if it works without rubbing under load. Pile of shit. I can't ditch it on hers like I have done because she needs the gears. Chances are she will get new kit before I do, just so I can stop dealing with the crap she has now.
  • + 7
 Could be useful if there's enduro race at Mt Everest.
  • + 5
 @PigeonLips - I understand what you're saying, but there was a time when your nine speed drivetrain was ''the next big thing'' and had quite a bit of resistance as well.
  • + 2
 @mikelevy. if the article was written more conceptually based and stressed the ideas and progress from an experimentry standpoint, I think the article may have gotten less WTF's and why do we need this?? I at first was shocked to think that they are already looking at bringing out an 11spd to the MTB world when the 10speed was adopted as a new standard and isn't beneficial in a few sub-genres of the sport. Now, I see SRAM's points, at the same time, its again, another non standard standard attempting to be introduced. The 9spd was similar, but different in lots of sense. It wasn't too radical of a change in general, just again, the full upgrading of components which eventually most people assimilated to over time due to upgrades and new bikes.

To be honest, I would gladly adopt the single, non chainguide specific chaingring. Although, would the 11spd chain ring be compatible with 9 and 10 as well? if so, you may have a winner.
  • + 12
 I'm lost as to why people don't see this as a step forward. If you don't need the range, don't upgrade from your 1x9. If you do need the range, wouldn't you rather have it without a front shifter? How can eliminating that not be a big step forward? Do people actually like a front mech? Do you like the way your suspension works in a granny gear? Do you like the mess of cables and having nowhere to put your dropper post trigger? Do you like the way you drop it into granny and you go instantly go into high revs and have to shift the back at the same time to compensate? Geez, if you were currently running this new system and someone tried to sell you on a front mech, would you say 'hey that looks better, give me more moving parts and another thing to bolt to my bars"?

I can't see how many people are managing with 1x9 unless they live in places with no big climbs and/or slow descents. If you are running a 34T, you have a bare minimum of DH gears and your climbing gear sucks ass if you live in the mountains. And if you are running a 32T, your climbing gear is still quite tough and you spin out at 25km/h. How is this "all you need". Sure, maybe it's "kinda ok and better than a POS front mech", but surely there's room for improvement? If you don't think so and your terrain or monster sized quads allow for pushing a 34x34, maybe stand aside for a second and imagine that some people need to climb big mountains with mortal legs and descend at high speed on the other side and they want this to happen with one shifter, not two.

I remember very clearly when 8 speed came out and the resistance was similar. All the naysayers can have their 13-28 7 speed cassettes. Try that shit on a 1x7 and tell me if you want progress or not.

This will sell. Just wait and see.
  • + 5
 The argument "if you don't like it don't buy it" isn't valid because sooner or later you won't HAVE a choice. Go to the sram website and check out their range for 2012!
X-5 is 10 speed. X-7, X-9 and X0 are 9 or 10speed for the moment. XX is 10speed and now XX1 with 11 speed.
I've been running a 1x8 setup since 1998 until few years ago I was running sram X5 trigger shifters and x-7 deraileur (all 9 speed deraileurs are compatible with 8 speed systems). Now I'm running an X4 trigger shifter with another x-7 deraileur. Sram makes 3 8speed cassettes which are good enough for me as I have no interest in having an XTR/XO/XX drivetrain. But in 2014 whose to say I'll still be able to find 8 speed parts or even 9 speed parts? I'll probably be force to buy a 10 speed which I will no doubt cut down to 8 or 7 speeds!
Wish they'd just go in the micro cassette direction like in the specialized DH team...
  • + 2
 I don't see any choices disappearing, only new choices appearing... in fact, if I so chose, I could ride a single speed bike with a coaster brake that was manufactured in the 50's. Just because the newest lineup from any given company is different than what you want does not mean that the millions of parts manufactured in the past are suddenly going to disappear. You will ALWAYS be able to locate the parts you want if you are willing to take the time to look for them. If you have an addiction to buying new new new, then I'm going to benefit when you upgrade every year... I'll buy your 'old' parts cheap and love 'em to death.
  • + 12
 but it goes to Eleven!
  • + 6
 I think this is a RAD IDEA!!

I am running 1 x 10 with 33T front chainring (with E13 XCX chain device), and 11-36T rear cassette, on my 29er

ap1.pinkbike.org/p4pb7671928/p4pb7671928.jpg

I rarely spin out (only on the road going to the trail head) but there are times, especially when the terrain is wet, where 33T x 36T is simply not low enough to climb very steep, technical terrain that is greasy, and I have to get off and push up the steeps Frown


in the dry, I can clean the majority of these same climbs, every time

I am not a "casual rider" by any means, lots of power on tap and my previous AM bike with 2 x 9 let me up the same climbs every time, even in the wet!


I would love to have a drivetrain with a wider range, specifically lower climbing gears as I really don't want to go back to a front derailleur and multiple chainrings ever again...
  • + 10
 This is the best summary on this discussion that I could find. www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbVKWCpNFhY>;
  • + 2
 10 speed is already hard enough to keep tuned up right. The cogs are too close together. We make money in the shops because of this, however I will never ride anything more than nine speed if I have the choice. 11 speed= useless, maybe even downright stupid. We just changed standards to 10 speed, give us a break or even a brake that doesn't need bled every five minutes SRAM!
  • + 1
 For the "haters" out there let me just tell you the only tweek I've done on my 10 speed XT stuff since new is half a turn on the barrel adjuster... that is it. no new cables, no need to index, just faultless gears and I ride hard and they've done well over 1000 miles. It just works and the range is great for me wih a 34t ring and 11-36t cassette. I maybe think Sram have gone too far with this, purely on the ratios, a 42t cog is just plain stupid, a 9-38t 11speed cassette, teamed with say a 34/35t ring would be a pretty good combo.
  • + 2
 to not to break your head thinking & imagine things that you're not going to buy, let's just ride down the hills... nobody needs gears
  • + 1
 This is just SRAM trying to compete with Shimano on the marketing front, who has honestly been kicking their ass lately. The last good thing SRAM came up with was the 1 to 1 ratio, all they've done since then is make rattling drivetrains that feel like they are made of plastic, and copy everything Shimano does, though not as well.

Bums me out that mtb's are going to 11 speeds, yet these A-Hole dipshit "engineers" still haven't figured out how to do a decent internal drivetrain. 10 speed was my limit, this sucks.
  • + 3
 We can discuss as much as we want, but the fact of the matter is, most of us aren't able to afford the XX drivetrain anyway.
  • + 1
 " We can discuss as much as we want, but the fact of the matter is, most of us aren't able to afford the XX drivetrain anyway."

And that ladies and gentlemen is the biggest problem with all of this! The majority of riders will never spend the money on this. Even those who ride Enduro which this is apparently aimed at. It will be such an expense to change everything. And you will have to change EVERYTHING drive train related.

I don't think it's a bad idea for progression, I really don't. But how about a 10speed version of that front chainring? That'd be awesome enough!
  • + 2
 Well since I do downhill and have a downhill bike, I have a road cassette with 9 cogs. 10 or 11 tooth cogs would make less of a difference for me than someone that did both climbing and downhill. I have like 1 maybe 2 good climbing gears but the rest are all definitely descending gears. If I rode all mountain maybe I'd want more gears so that I had more climbing without affecting the descending gears too. Might make your bike a bit more well rounded.
  • + 3
 Finally someone talking sense. I love having a bike versatile enough to just head out the door, ride to the trails, do my thing and ride back. When ten speed came out I thought 2x10 was perfect. If we can ditch the cost, weight, geometry restriction and unnecesary complexity of the front mech but still have low enough gears for killer climbs and high enough gears to make decent progress on the way to the trails I'm all for it.
  • + 1
 Jarno: that actually sounds like a REALLY fun 29'r aye. Didn't know the stays were that short. With 1x drivetrains being ALL I ride, this sounds awesome.
  • + 1
 After thinking about it more, I now like this idea since the cogs are so much bigger. Nice work SRAM, I look forward to trying it.
  • + 1
 This may sound like a very basic observation, but couldn't they just increase the spread of the gears instead of adding more? I understand to run a single chainring, you need a larger range of gears, but why would you need 9 gears in between the highest and lowest gears? Couldn't you just have the same high and low rear cogs and still have only 7 gears in between, or would the higher increments between gears complicate the function of the rear derailleur?

I only ride DH, and am still hoping they come out with a 3 speed internally geared rear hub: climbing, coasting, and charging.
  • + 2
 @tetonlarry The reason they added more was because they didn't want to increase the gear ratio between cogs more than 13%. You can have an increase between cogs that is greater than 13% without serious problems for the deraileurs. Yes they could have just made a cassette with less cogs but the same spread between low and high.
Heck they THEY should have donethat, in my humble opinion, AND decreased the lowest cog to a 9T that way they wouldn't need a 41T rear cog! The reason for a 41T is so that you can, for example, run a 36T chainring without losing too much on the greatest gear ratio eg 36/10 (3.6*) which is decent and your easiest would be 36/41 (0.87)
If you had a 9T you could have 32/9 (3.56) and the easiest would be 32/36 (0.89) thus only needing a 9-36 cassette rather than a 10-41 which would be lighter, allow you to run a smaller chainring (also lighter) and thus have even more ground clearance AND , last but not least, no need for a new deraileur!
*3.6 means for every full rotation of the cranks your rear wheel makes 3.6 revolutions.
  • + 3
 Those ratio increases are really, really for roadies and fireroad warriors, for geeks concerned about things like brake jack, pedal bob, stiction and all other crap that is simply not present "when you really go for it". It is for people who endulge tech details while riding - Who on earth in technical terrain tries to find the perfect gear ratio?!

Yesterday I've done more than two hours on technical trails, at high heart rate, trying to beat my friends time on a specific loop, I could not give a less shit about anything else than how fast do i regenerate after efforts, how hard can I push, how do my quads feel, when should I give my lower back some rest, can I go one more cllimb standing or I should go slower seated, being very parcitular to find the right line between stones. I focused to look ahead on descents - scanning terrain for bigger rocks as I rode HT saddle up on flat pedals so no room for error on steeps

Not for a single moment had I been thinking whether my 11-34 cassette is good enough, I was rather looking for a place suitable for shifting, not how much should i shift. When I didn't shift to a light enough gear I lifted my ass up and hammered it, didn't wonder whether I should have been on an easier gear, because I had those choices - 1.mash it up in pain, 2.try to shift up more risking to break the chain, or coming to a stop - OR 3. be a looser, get off the bike and contemplate - if I only had fkn 10sp 11-36 that sits on my other bike that I left home - or maybe I could buy this new 11sp stuff
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns I agree that the ratio increases really are for roadies et al. However, choosing a cassette based on where and what type of terrain you ride makes sense. Having a 11-26 cassette will make me push the bike more often than if I had a 11-32 (I run a 1x8 setup).
If I'm going to be doing more enduro riding in the alpes on my 19kg DH bike then I'll run a 11-32T cassette with a 32T chainring if however i'm going to be riding only in the bike park I'll cut my cassette down to 11-21 5 speed setup.(by the wayI gon't change cassette setup before each ride but only for bikepark season or offseason) Ofcourse, I agree with you that people should just man up, stand and push harder instead of constantly blaming the equipment!
  • + 1
 Sintra - I was a bit unclear, I mant that 11-34 is all a man needs for most of stuff. And I agree - Cassette ranges depend on a lot of things, location, like the weight of your wheels, how effective is your bike. If I lived in Alps and had to climb like 1000m on a 6" AM bike I would definitely run 2x? to get more efficient cadence. I am yet to try a single-speed for trail riding, a rumour has it that if you can truly ride one your aggressive riding capacity goes up big time.
  • + 1
 Yeah I agree 11-34 is all you need. For regular trail riding I just need an 11-28 and only run an 11-32 because of the Alpes. Personally I find big cassettes unpleasant to the eye. If I ran a 2x8 or 2x9 setup I'd run a road cassette probably 11-25 at most. But I've been riding my 19kg DH bike up and downhill for years on my 1x8 setup and just got used to it. Might not be the fastest climber but have passed many xc riders back in the day.
[Reply]
  • + 15
 Why? Seriously, why? 9, 10 now 11, we'll end up with 21 speed supermarket drivetrain at the end, won't we?! 9 is way to go for mtb and I'll stick to it, until there will be as light, simple and un-damaging (for chain, chain ring teeth etc) solution with more gears.
  • + 4
 If that chain management thing works that's fantastic
  • + 2
 Obviously it will never be lighter or simpler with more gears but by that logic 8 speed is better as it is lighter and simpler and the 5 speed is even better than that.
  • + 10
 Clearly a DH'ers point of view
  • + 1
 I don't think 8speed is lighter, they use a much heavier chain and cassette. Dura-ace 10sp would be lighter than an 8sp set up
  • + 4
 By "that chain management thing" i assume you mean SRAM's ripoff of the Shimano shadow plus derrailleur and slightly differently shaped chainring teeth? certainly nothing new there then.
  • - 3
 i gave up running 5 speed as my friends made fun of me, damn peer pressure means i now use 6 gears.. because racer
  • + 12
 This pisses me off solely for the reason its 11 and i have OCD.. 10 IS A NICE ROUND NUMBER!
  • + 16
 @Reinholds:

It wasn't that long ago that your sacred 9 speed was viewed with the same disdain that you hold for 11 speed. If PB comments ran the industry we'd all be on rigid singlespeed bikes with V brakes - because trying any sort of innovation means at some point introducing a new standard, which is apparently going to cause the world to end this year.
  • + 3
 @allebong:
Yes, I agree, there are technologies taken as underdog and turned out as new and better standard, but in this case I beg to differ. Everyone just now got used to standard of 10 speed, now its next standard. If it continues like this, after 6 month there will be new SRAM 12 speed standard and God knows what else. And all it is, is marketing from component manufacturers and way of getting extra money from those who follow the trends.
If you want to go AM or uphill on mtb, you're better of with 9X2 drivetrain, it's way more flexible then 12X1, even for free ride it's all good. If you want to go downhill, 8X1 is technically all you need, 9X1 is nice extra to have. I do not see a true market for this product. I do not see me switching nor to 11X1, 12X1 or 68X1 when my grand kids will try to explain how dope it is.
  • + 4
 @allebong - You've hit the nail on the head. We're all using gear that was at one time ''the latest and greatest'', with much of it receiving just as much resistance as anything else that is shown for the first time.

Bottom line is that 10 speed isn't going anywhere anytime soon. XX1 will be an option that will work for some riders in some places. The math proves that it can be used to create a simpler drivetrain that actually has a wider gear spread than some double ring combos.
  • + 3
 My basic issue (not directed at you in particular) is that people who already run 9 speed complain that 10 or 11 speed will be too fragile or short lived. So if chain life is so important, why aren't they running 6 speed? or 3 speed? or even singlespeed, since that lasts basically forever? The answer of course is that they have accepted a compromise between gear range and system complexity - which generally comes out to about 9 speeds for the majority. But my point is that some riders, who perhaps only ride in dry clean conditions, may be perfectly suited to giving up some transmission life for an increased gear range with a single ring. This is actually something that does interest me - I currently run 2x9 with 22-36 up front at 34-11 up back. That gives me a great spread from incredibly low granny to pretty high top end. But it comes at a cost of 2 chainrings, and since I haven't got a chainguide (yet...) I sometimes suffer from dropped chains and a huge amount of chain slap. I don't want to ditch the granny ring ratios so a 1x11 that can come somewhat close to my current gears would be very interesting. As I said, any criticism that you can level against a certain number of gears can be shifted down the range so that I could accuse you of just being a mindless trend follower by running a 9 speed when you should have stuck with 5/6/7 and not fallen for the marketing hype. If you are happy running 9 speed when you could be running less, why shouldn't people be happy running even a 12 speed?
  • + 2
 makes me think that a lightweight reliable widerange gear system is beyond modern technology, one "solution" after another....all incompatible...all with a compromise....how hard can it be.
  • + 0
 I hear you and I get your point. FYI there is no way of getting 11X1 to act as 9X2 drivetrain. And if you're ready to suffer the gear loss from 9X2 to 11X1, then you're as good of with 11X1 as with 10X1 or 9X1, only gaining chain lifetime, cassette lifetime and chainring lifetime.
  • + 1
 My main interest in this article is the potential for a 42 tooth rear sprocket - the implications of this are pretty important. I've gone over to sheldon browns gear calculator: sheldonbrown.com/gears : My lowest gear - (26in wheel, 170 cranks) is 22-34 for a gain ratio of 1.3. If I had a 32-42 on an 11 speed that would be 1.5. So even my lowest gear isn't that far below what 11x1 is promising. Since I'm usually in the second or third largest sprocket that means the 11 speed would give me exactly the same climbing performance that I currently have. If I had a 9x1 with a 32t front I'd be limited by the 34 tooth maximum with the current rear mech - giving me a gain ratio of 1.8, much above what I'd like for climbs, to say nothing of spinning out on descents. So I'd argue that 11x1 actually replicates my current gearing pretty well at least as far as climbing is concerned, while 1x9 cannot come close no matter what you try. I wouldn't be surprised if a 11x1 with a guide lasts at least as long as a 2x9 without since my chain currently gets slapped about like mad and likes getting jammed when shifting between front rings.
  • + 3
 Rein, how can running a 1x9 be the same compromise as a 1x11? 9 speed big range cassettes are 11-34T. Any more and the jumps will suck ass big time. 10 speed is 11-36T which is more range. Looks like the 11 speed will be 10-42T perhaps which is waaaay more range. Why would you try and argue that anyone happy going to a single ring should be just as happy with crap 9 speed gearing as they would with effective broad range gearing that will be available with 11 speed? You are making no sense.

Your arguments about the negatives of 10 and 11 speed are the same ones used about 8 speed 15 years ago. The funny thing is my 10 speed has better life and less broken chains than my 7 speed ever did. Cassette life? More gears to spread the load over the life of the cassette = longer life. Chainring lifetime will be less, for the exact opposite reason. It works both ways.
  • + 1
 @kramster
Idea was that there is difference between 2X9 and 1X11 how ever you take it. If he is ready to loose that one, I do not see a reason why not to choose the 9sp or 10sp. It's personal preference, I'm telling I do not see a point of having 1x11 whatsoever.
What is the application of it? I have 1x9 at 11-28t and I have never needed anything more in woods, park or dh track. If you're riding AM, XC, what is wrong with 2X9? There are chain guide systems for 2 chainrings, they work and very well.
  • + 2
 10 speed might not be going anywhere but 9 speed will! I don't disagree with the one chainring, one deraileur and one shifter idea just that in my humble opinion there are better ways to achieve the same goal! Whatever happened to the micro cassette idea? It would allow you to run a 32T chainring or smaller and you'd still have a good range WITHOUT the dinner plate rear cog! You seriously wanna ride around with a 41T in the back?
  • + 1
 BTW, I'm not trash talking here, I'm interested in getting know what for this product is created.
  • + 4
 I have a hate for front derailleurs. They are finicky, they require real estate on the bar for a shifter that I now use for a dropper post, add another cable and they drop chains without a guide and if you are adding a guide anyway the end result is heavier. Smaller little cog = smaller required front ring = more ground clearance = lower acceptable BB height. For tech climbing, dropping into a granny sucks. You have to shift two ends at the same time to avoid a massive gear change which causes loss of momentum. Also, many suspension designs like VPP suck ass in a granny gear.

For me it's not about the 11 speed. It's about the smaller little cog and a bigger big cog. I run a 1x10 currently and I want more range but there is no way I will ever run a front mech again. There are too many positives to running 1 ring. I would just like a touch more at each end. 10x38 would suit me nicely. If they offered that in a 10 speed I would take it, but that seems unlikely. Although I suppose I could take an 11 speed 10-42 and ditch the big cog to make it 10 speed with whatever the next cog down is.
  • + 1
 Hilarious commentary about how supposedly inferior or troublesome FDs are. I've been riding MTBs for over 20 years and never had a problem installing, using or maintaining a front der. Suddenly, because "all mountain" is the hot new trendy image, and because people living in Flatlandia can ride 1x___ without hampering their climbing ability, everyone is whinging about how FDs are useless, extra weight, don't work well, etc.

So many people working so hard to present an image of toughness. Pretty sad, really.
  • + 3
 FOxtrot, you must be even older than me if you need a bailout gear LOL
  • + 3
 ...But these go to 11.
  • + 5
 CFO, how you get image and toughness out of this I will never know. I've been riding for 20 years, and maybe I'm just a retard of an ex bike mechanic that worked with a bunch of retards that were not able to set up a front derailleur. Not sure why they bother making chainguides since they work so well without one. I neither live in flatlandia, nor give a shit about the image you suggest my 1x10 exudes. I live in the mountains and ride 150+ days a year and my take on FD's are they are a pile of shit for the mulitple reasons I stated above. I am totally sold on single ring setups and have been for years (about 10 years actually, long before it was cool). When I moved back to Canada, I was required to run a granny again in Alberta and the disdain for them flooded back after using one again, mostly from dropping chains and the crap pedal feedback in granny gear that often included some chainsuck. Hadn't had chainsuck on worn out beat up old single ring in many years, but straight away I was dealing with it again, along with rubbing, miss-shifting and double shifting to prevent hyper revving when charging into a steep tech section and dropping to granny. I was one of the first in my area to ditch the big ring on my 'freetard' bike back in 1996 too, not because it was cool but because I realized I could make a front derailleur less shit by only having to get it to work with 2 rings instead of 3. Only took the industry 16 years to catch onto that one.
  • + 6
 Perhaps the latest crop of FD's are working near flawlessly. But to suggest that for 20 years you've never ever ever had a problem with a front derailleur tells me you are either riding nothing but a hardtail, riding poodle paths like a grandma or talking shit. Seems like the latest trend in MTB is to hate on anything that's new, except even that's not new at all. Are you one of the guys I had to listen to back in the 90's talking shit about how 8 speed was terrible and that Shimano were a bunch of crooks because you couldn't run V-brakes with the old levers?

This tech is not merely adding another gear. It's eliminating a shifter, a cable, a derailleur and a chainguide with a range that you don't have to be tough to push. How does that fit in with your image?

Maybe you're working too hard on an image of your own. Pretty sad, really.
  • + 5
 I'd really like to go to a single chain ring, but I need more range in the back. I like this direction they are taking.

Why do people here always complain so much? I sense a strong resistance to change in this community.
  • + 2
 Change is not always a good thing, i think the industry is going the wrong way. Id rather see more real innovations and improvements in the price and build quality of bikes and components ( An example would be the M slacker form yesterday ) than people constantly chaining standards so the market doest dry up.
  • + 1
 I d like to see them take old kit for recycling and maybe give a trade in value for it, recondition it and resell them
to people who dont want to upgrade but cant get spares anymore, the shops cant stock everything forever... Change is OK but wasteful consumerism is a little out of date....yeah i know .."not economicaly viable".....yet....
  • + 4
 I've yet to see someone have their front derailleur ripped off their bike or explode, yet I've seen it happen to rear derailleurs many times. The rear derailleur is THE weak spot on any mountain bike, and now SRAM is making it worse by making the cage even longer and more exposed. They are exasperating the most unreliable part in mountain biking, aside from Elixer brakes.
[Reply]
  • + 12
 meh... Did 12 hours of Sundance on a 1x9 I borrowed (don't have a xc bike), and never ran out of gears. If this is really " going to be aimed at riders who are fit enough that they may be already considering going to a single ring setup." Then it feels like overkill. If a 1x9 can pedal me up what people pay to ride down, then I'd think a 1x10 should be plenty.

Extra gears aside, to invest in this setup isn't only going to be crazy expensive, (new deraileur, crankset, shifter, I'm assuming it fits on a 10spd cassette body, if not then specific wheels.), but when/if anything breaks only SRAM will have replacement parts, and if this doesn't take off then a consumer is not going to have a replacement part in 5 years or so.

I also don't know if SRAM already has contracts lined up with bicycle manufacturers, but unless they can get these setups to come stock on a few bikes the odds of them ever selling are extremely low, simply because to do this entire setup aftermarket is so costly that it's going to be a very rare sale.

Appreciation for the engineers, and R&D guys always trying to push the box, but this looks to be another Rapidrise, or XT intregrated brake lever/shifter.
  • - 3
 Obviously you have never dealt with Sram directly. They have anything you will need for their new products. Funny that you mention the Shimano failures in the market, its hard to come up with Sram failures.
  • + 0
 You have a fair point Instigator, but i think its mostly down to SRAM not releasing as kooky ideas. Realistically, 11 speed was a marketing inevitability, so I guess SRAM just decided to get there first.
  • + 1
 shimano patented 12 speed aaaaaages ago, just saying
  • + 2
 Not running out of gears with 1x9 on a 12 hour race course is hardly indicitive of global all mountain riding. I don't run out of gears on my downhill bike on a dh course either.
  • + 3
 Of course this is going to be expensive. But you have to remember that the point of making XX1 isn't necessarily to sell XX1. Seeing something like this on the bike of top racers winning enduro and XC events enhances brand equity and top-of-mind-awareness in the minds of consumers of bike components. They see this stuff and think --"SRAM is good, I buy SRAM." So, yes, it's part of marketing. But so is having winning racers--and your racers need better and better components to win--so they're not just making useless components for the sake of making useless components.
  • + 1
 Instigator, SRAM does not have everything they will need for their new products. Working in a shop, SRAM has the most failures with components by far. I will say that they try really hard to take care of their customers regardless of their numerous failures. SRAM has no replacement parts for certain cranksets that are sold on bikes from last year even.
  • + 3
 Yeah, Instigators comment is complete BS. SRAM makes up for their lack of quality and durability with a liberal warrant department, but they certainly don't always have what you need. I would rather have them make parts to last, but they would rather make things cheap and light and warranty whenever necessary. SRAM should be called SWARRANTY.
  • + 1
 araines1 I have to disagree with your argument that racers needing new stuff to win. Bike tech itself is a tiny addition to success, it is the rider, his skills and fitness that play a major role here. You can't say that Minnaar is where he is on the podium because he rides a V10c,Sam Hills Iron Horse Sunday wasn't really a silver bullet at the time when he dominated the circuit. Same in Enduro, Jerome's Jekyll definitely isn't a superior bike, a factor that makes him win so many races. He would win on any bike whether it is Spec Enduro, SC Nomad, Trek Slash etc.

Those parts are just products that are being made up to adress potential "need" and then released for us to buy them, with according marketing campaign making sure that we will buy them. The times where mass production of same elements was the way to increase the profit is gone since industries became automatized and computer controlled, and it became cheaper to produce lots of different stuff. You earn money by convincing people to buy new stuff by adressing their irrational emotions. You constantly make something new whether someone needs it or not - it is about cash flow, way more than about innovation or improving performance - it is about creating and satysfying a desire, rather than need.

It is up to you whether you play the game or not, but no matter what it remains a constant fact that in mountain biking the technology will never make up for lesser skill and fitness, especially for amateurs
  • + 1
 That's exactly my point, WAKI. Having XX1 and the like on the bikes of winning racers is creating that need. I'm a senior marketing major, I know all about it. As far as equipment being a factor at the elite level, I'm pretty sure Minnaar couldn't win a race at Leogang on a rigid '94 Diamondback. So there is a bit if innovation involved in creating these products. If everyone's fitness is at the same level then having a lighter bike that lets you push just a bit harder/longer or having less friction in your chainguide that lets you pedal a bit more efficiently then it's possible that these products do produce a bit of an "edge" for racers. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point.
[Reply]
  • + 12
 Do mtb people throw internet tantrums when shimano comes out with a new fishing reel? every company on earth is going to make something you dont want to buy. just dont f*ckin buy it.
[Reply]
  • + 10
 Hot, damn. Mad respect to Sram for trying something different. Blah blah blah waaaaaah new standards in the industry waaaah my 2x10 is worthless now. Haters gon hate, But don't bag it till you try it. That looks awesome
  • + 4
 waaahwaaah haters gonna hate the haters. i know you know i know im right!
  • + 2
 It's not a question of 'haters gonna hate'. People can't keep using that line to describe free thinking individuals who see through the real reason of these periodic mechanical tweaks, which is market stagnation prevention.
  • + 2
 So if some drivetrain part maker decided that we needed 14 gears on a cassette, you'd applaud them for "progressing the sport"? There's no way someone can critically analyze such a decision? It just HAS to be "progressing the sport"?

What if some hipster in Portland OR decides that all the hipsters show their "irony" best by riding a bike with a full pantload of feces? Is that "progressing the sport" too?
  • + 2
 tell me more about the pantload of feces critical mass ride.............just curious!!!!
  • + 0
 ummmmm, no. A pantload of feces will not improve your riding. I think it may change the way you ride, but it's not going to benefit you. Heck 14 gears would be quite nice actually. Rohloff do something like that already? correct me if i'm wrong.
[Reply]
  • + 8
 Single chain ring for people with less power. I think this will be great for female riders wanting to ditch a double chain ring. My girlfriend rides a hamerschmidt and couldn't be happier with gear selection but this looks to be an affordable solution for a premade package bike. I don't see the point in getting upset about a new product I'm sure they have done enough research to warrant putting it into production. I for one love the amount of choice we have as riders to customize and personalize our bikes.
  • - 2
 Has nothing to do with "power" or gender. You've obviously never ridden with any fast women. And why would your girlfriend "need" a 1-by setup?
  • + 2
 I'm sorry to have offended you or any female riders. Actually she is quite fast but she does way higher rpm than me sitting and I have to get off my seat to grunt it out in a much higher gear, we run single chain ring because we are gravity oriented, we mainly climb farm or private roads to get to our trails. You quote me as saying "need" when I never implied it, our set ups are for enjoying the descent without worrying about our chains coming off, we don't race and our climbs are purely a means of getting to our faverout runs.
  • - 9
 dude-istan,

You didn't "offend" me at all. I don't find poseurs and idiots "offensive," I find them pitiful. As to the rest of your excuses, my only reason to climb any hill is for the descent.

What you're telling us all is that you think the IMAGE of "gravity-oriented" riding is presented with 1x___. Go on with your poseurdom and idiocy, I won't be offended. I'll just laugh, pitifully, at your need to build up bikes for an IMAGE.
  • + 2
 Oldfaith- you hit the nail on the head. Oldfaith with his first statement is saying this; 11 speed with single ring is for people with less power that normally need more than one ring to climb with. 1x9, 1x10 have a spread big enough to cover the ranges that anyone should ever need with the proper size ring up front. Foxtrot- no need to attack people that don't need double or triple rings for climbing or anything at all.
  • - 1
 Who's attacking?

Like everyone else here, I'm just sharing a viewpoint. I might hold it, or I might just be imagining it. What's the difference? Does everyone HAVE TO agree?
[Reply]
  • + 7
 I predicted this for 2013 or 2014 in the last pinkbike post about the new 10speed system!!! If you're going to stick to the prehistoric deraileur system please move in the direction of the micro cassette! I'd prefer a 9-30T 8 speed cassette with a 26 to 30T chainring! It'd be lighter AND you could use existing deraileurs! I've been using a 1x8 system on all my bikes since 1999!
[Reply]
  • + 6
 This is awesome news for the big wheel. With a shorter chain stay on a 29er the gap between big wheel bikes with 26 handling is getting smaller. With the loss of the FD the geometry of a 29er just got endless possibilities. cant wait to see how this is going to change the MTB world.
  • - 2
 Amazing that you're completely unaware of E-type FD mounts and ignorant of how to allow a FD with short CS.

Good job buying all the know-nothing hype about "niners" though. Seriously, really good job! You regurgitate idiotic pap as well as the folks at MBA.
  • + 4
 I believe the whole 29 inch wheels and front deraillieur clashing issues is due to the front derailliuer extending BACKWARDS, into the space occupied by a beefy, muddy tyre. No need to be such a d***...
  • + 2
 I believe the whole 29 inch wheels and front deraillieur clashing issues is due to the front derailliuer extending BACKWARDS, into the space occupied by a beefy, muddy tyre. No need to be such a d***...
  • + 1
 Yet another reason to hate the dorky 29rs, they like 11 speed as much as their bar ends and their lycra. 29rs are like bad dogs; the problem is the owners.
[Reply]
  • + 9
 11 speed because 10 speed just didn't wear out fast enough.
  • + 3
 and sensitive to micro amounts of hanger misalignment..
  • + 4
 The gaps between the cogs are likely the very same as found on current 10 speed setups, meaning that it shouldn't be any more difficult to setup or maintain. The same goes for the chain.
  • + 0
 Couldn't be the same Mike Levy without changing the size of the free hub body. The chain will be similar to a 10 speed most likely, but that's it.
  • + 3
 The freehub body is entirely different and the largest cog is pinned to the second largest, meaning that it doesn't actually attach to the F/H. It also looks as if there is no lockring in the traditional sense... lots going in there, but we'll hopefully get to see more soon.
[Reply]
  • + 4
 i run 1x10, sram xx rear mech, 11-36 cassette, 38t front chainring, never looked back to triple/double set up again, 30 gears is crazy, not required at all, saves a lot of weight and i have all the ratios i need, tidies up the bike loads. oh and if you think its another hype, well this hype will cost a lot less than a full front and rear gear set up, if speced sensibly, your getting rid of components remember,
[Reply]
  • + 3
 Anything to get more money out of us ....11 gears ? .....it's just getting so stupid ! ....no doubt you will need a shed load of other stuff to make it compatable ....shove it where the sun don't shine and stop treating us like idiots with money to burn !!!!
[Reply]
  • + 3
 Awesome. I've been rocking a single ring on my Genesis Core since I built it this winter, 1 x 8 (because I'm cheap) Never felt like I needed more gears on the trails.
Chains never came off either, no chain device, just a bash gaurd and tight(ish) chain.

I would recommend it.

www.pinkbike.com/photo/7627521
  • + 2
 That setup makes sense for hardtails, but throw some chain growth in and you drop chains. Riding my 6" bike on dh trails I used to drop chains even with a front mech until I got a Stinger. Also recommended
  • + 1
 dom69foco - aye you're right mate, I never thought of that. It makes sense why they are standard on DH rigs.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 I wish they'd stop spending money on R&D for this stuff and just get on with the frame mount internal gearbox. I don't care if it adds a 1/2 pound over the total bike, you'd end up with so much less unsprung weight, less broken parts, more clearance at the front ring depending on how its made, no chainline issues, a lighter rear hub even if thats where the ratchet system stayed, and dishless rear wheels would be really easy to get out of normal hub widths.

Otherwise, sure make the 11 speed for those willing to be on the leading edge, and pay for it. It only seems to need the cassette and shifter, the rear mech transfers from 10 speed from what I understood. As for the 32 main ring, aren't most bikes now being built with either granny/36, or just straight 36 in mind? I'd expect those racing this setup to be fit enough to pull a 34 or 36 front with the current crop of 1x10.

Yeroon
[Reply]
  • + 3
 Ooky people listen up.

1. The cassette on the pic appears to be:
9-11-13-15-17-20-24-28-32-36-42 This gives the range of 466%, which is close to the 2x9, but still off by a small bit.

2. The front with alternating wide/narrow teeth is a brilliant idea, 1by drivetrain or not.

3. The whole concept works fine. I personally run 11-38 custom cassette ( 9 speed ) and after the initial wtf due to the cog size it works very well - even with the current rear deraileurs.

Overall - the concept is intriguing and I wonder how far SRAM is willing to take it.
[Reply]
  • + 5
 Hey CFO... you are a pompous douchebag....Now go ahead and slam me with a 100 point word laden reply.... won't change a thing....prick.
  • - 1
 uh, you miss the jokes and it's not because you're superior.
  • + 1
 there was no joke...your page is worded in the same pompous fashion.... and never said I was "superior". See what i mean.... Superior?? are you kidding me?
[Reply]
  • + 3
 Please make a 30T or even 28T ring - yes you will sacrifice speed, but you'll have a better climbing range. If you're down in the 9, 10 or 11 tooth settings, chances are your moving pretty fast and just handling the bike through the terrain. Unless you're racing DH, the slightly smaller chain ring, will be more versatile for AM riding. (fit or not) I like options.
  • + 1
 I totally agree with you neimbc. The only way to get a 28 tooth nowadays is to have it custom made (hard to find someone to do this). Most privateers are making only 30 or 31 tooth spiders. I can't believe the industry hasn't realized the need for a 28 tooth for a 1x10 set up. If anything the high gear on the cassette should be a 8 or 9 tooth if that is possible. In my eyes the only downside of a 1x10 is its inability to create an effective low gear combination to climb steeps. A smaller chain ring, i.e. less than a 30 tooth would fix this right up. All my rides are 1x9 and I'm always wishing I had a 28 tooth (or smaller) chainring up front.
  • + 2
 MRP already makes 28 and 30t chainrings for SRAM cranks (X0, X9, & Truvativ AKA) - you can order one today, we have them in stock. MRP Bling Ring. Boom.
  • + 0
 You can buy many rings of that size already
  • + 0
 Frankly, if you feel the need to run a 30 or 28t on a 1 x drivetrain, either you live on everest or similar, or you are just plain un fit and wanting to have the latest "must have". No offense but why on earth would you want to run such a low gear? If you want pedal anywhere on a DH run at a centre or in the mountains, i.e. where you would want an AM bike, you ain't gonna be pedaling or gaining much speed from a 28-11! I run a 34t ring and a 11-36 cassette and I'm by no means a quick guy DH, I'm no slouch but I'm not gonna give any season Enduro rider a run for there money, but even I run out of gears on some trails.

Bottom line, if you think you need a 28t chainring, you are probably, much, much better off with a double.
  • + 1
 I dunno about that, the 28t and 30t are actually quite handy for 29er riders who want to go to 1x10. I'm running a 32t on my new Tallboy LTc and I'm thinking about giving the 30t a try - that'd be the equivalent of a 33t on a 26" bike and I usually run between 33-36t on my 26" bike. Might not be ideal for racing Enduros where you need the taller gear for descents, but for high-altitude riding it's pretty nice.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 this is disastrous, i use a 32t x 8 and thinking that a 7 or even a 6 could be more than perfect. obviously if your abit more of a power house you could switch to a 36T ... they should decrease the amount of sprockets saving weight and with that weight saving maybe they could just increase the strength of the cassette and still be lighter than a 9sp...
  • + 1
 Missing the point, though =) This setup can be built so that a single ringe and 11spd cassette actually has a wider range than some current double ring setups. A larger gear range, lighter, and much simpler.
  • + 1
 32t up front, and maybe a 10 to 42t on the back ? going smaller than 11 on the back is welcome in my book but who's going to need such an easy gear? "32/42" im @ 32/32 .. and i can up very steep stuff... and putting that easy gear on a downhill or enduro bike, is abit of a joke isnt it ????
[Reply]
  • + 3
 I actually like idea .Because 11-36 and 32 at front can't give high speed on straiths. just don't want go to front double.One ring shifting is so much easier. Hope to try this stuff some day
  • + 3
 Just wait a couple years and then you'll be able to get 12 speed...
  • + 4
 I will get MX bike insted Big Grin
  • + 2
 Well if they came out with a micro cassette with the smallest cog being a 9T then you wouldn't need a retarded 11-41 or 10-41 cassette!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Presumably SRAM has thought about addressing extreme chain angle? Not so much of an isue on a 29er, but if they are thinking of just adding a cassette using the existing spacing, surely that's going to make for some rather inefficient, fast wearing drivetrains. Current short chain stay bikes with a 10spd cassette already exibit this problem.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 If there's one good thing about all these systems it's that you have a choice, run whatever you like. Getting the proper ratios for your style of riding is what you need regardless of how many you actually have,you can do that with an 8-speed cassette. Doing a little math, to get ten gears out of a 1 x 10 setup takes 11 gears, with a 2 x 5 it only takes seven so it would be less rotating weight and take weight off the end of the bike and add it to the middle, in the case of a dually that would also be unsprung weight. I just find it funny that in mountain biking you need big jumps in ratios so why not just use fewer gears with bigger gaps? Good thing shifters can grab three gears at a time eh? Yeah, I can see the reasons to use a single ring but I'd settle for just losing the granny gear and get whatever cassette with the low you need. Hell, I couldn't be happier than with full XTR 8-speed!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 To me is not a matter of the range covered the problem is how fast you change from one gear to another, like from going downhill to uphill. i don´t want to go tac tac tac tac tac seven times when one is enough by changing the chain-ring.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Ok... When I bought my first serious MTB I ripped the 9-speed chains apart all the time till I was fat up with it and switched back to 8-speed. Over the years the "development" did not stop and I bought a couple of new bikes. Ripping 9-speed chains again. Then I had a 10-speed bike and I ripped the chain 3 times in just a couple of month.

Why the hell should I go for an even weaker chain?
  • + 0
 Agree with you.Had similar experience on 9 speed chains and same with 10.Only if they would make wide ratio cassetes for 8 speeds ... But we are those who make dead end's to engineers ..they are pushed by crowd of bikers to make light parts ... I think that it is possible to make more durable chain,but it will come at weight or at price ...
  • + 1
 No matter how often one snaps a chain, because of it beeing thin and weak, it'll never stop.
I love progression. It leads to new things. And from time to time they work. And If they don't they will vanish, anyways.
I never snapped a chain btw. This may be because of my everything, but strong legs. But hey... maybe I do, when we reach 15-Speed...^^
  • + 10
 Broken chains are almost always a user error. From improper setup, to not replacing them when they should be replaced.
  • + 1
 Sram and Shimano made 11-32 8 speed cassettes until recently (looks like I need to stock up on 8speed parts or I will be forced to switch to 10speed!) which with a 32T front ring is all you need to make a decent 1x8 speed system.
  • + 1
 lol they will force me to buy a single speed conversion kit.
  • + 1
 Grinsekater an I are in the bike-business long enough to know how to install a chain properly an when to replace it. But in most cases you are right, Marlfox87.
  • + 6
 Snapping chains that often has NOTHING to do with the width of chain, its 100% to do with the user! Sorry, learn to set a bike up before moaning about poor quality parts.
  • + 1
 well, it kinda does, its simple logic
  • + 1
 Maybe strong legs,but usually shifting under high load ....
  • + 2
 actually, the logic is that a narrower pin should be less likely to bend as there will be less leverage on the ends. this is negated by the reduction in torsional strength. a break would likely occur when torsional loads are exerted, such as during a shift.
  • + 1
 grinsekater, have you tried a Rohloff chain?
  • + 1
 I guess the connecting links are became thinner for the 9 and 10 speed chains. "Wippermann - Connex" Chains are way stronger than Shimano or SRAM but snap also (only later). I never shift under load. It just snaps while I stand up and pedal. Three days ago I made a frontflip because I ripped of the whole chainring of at my stumpjumper. First I thought the chain broke but the alloy bolts connecting the ring to the crank snapped. No I changed them back to steel ones. I want ride not stand in my basement and work on my bike.
[Reply]
  • + 5
 Just give us a nice, reliable 36-9t cassette and we're happy with the 1x10 setup!
[Reply]
  • + 4
 LETS KEEP CHANGING THINGS PURELY BECAUSE WE CAN COME ON GUYS IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE LETS MAKE TECHNOLOGY THAT PEOPLE SPENT HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS ON LAST YEAR OBSOLETE why.
  • + 0
 What's wrong with you? Can't you see they're PROGRESSING THE SPORT with their wasteful attitudes (buy it, DON'T WEAR IT OUT, replace it)? The true pinnacle of MTB riding is CONSTANT UPGRADES! The "spec" on your bike says more about you than your riding skill!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 That chainring is very interesting. With 1/2 of the teeth being thicker than the rest it means that you need to clock your chain on the ring properly so that the outer plates go over the thick teeth.not a big deal really but the chain better stay on through rough trails or it might be a pain getting it back on in a race.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Why is it the industry is always coming out with more gears but only easier ones!
I run 1x8, (and I live in the land of little rolling hills) Nova Scotia, and only want harder gears without using a monster chainring! Give me a sub 9tooth on a cassette!
  • + 1
 I think its because its hard to make a nicely shifting 8tooth ring. bmx's get away with it because its just single speed.
  • + 1
 i thing a 9 or 8 tooth ring would have to be smaller than the freehub body
  • + 1
 the specialized worldcup dh team runs a micro cassette with the smallest cog being 9T. It shifts fine. Sure you need a special hub because the 9T is smaller than the standard freehub body.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Shimano 600 and 2x5 and still going after 25 000km. 1st set of cogs and chainrings. Otherwise 1x9 and singlespeed. More gears mean paperthin cogs and chains made out of wet old bread and lots of wear. Another revenue fuck for bad corps. Want a durable, well sealed serviceable and simple 3 or 5 speed gearhub. Would love to have an auto-gearhub.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I run a 1x10 on my XC and 1x9 on my DH, i think both have to many XC bike i use the top 2 for climbing and the bottom 2 for the decent, GH bike just the bottom 3 depending on the decent , I have recently found a cassette with individual cogs so would be easier to have 1x6 on both and just have the top and bottom 2 you use with one extra as a spare.
I run X( and deore and both the same......
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Interesting that noone comments on the ''Innovative chain management technology" and unique looking chain ring design. I think this is a step in the right direction, but personally, I'm a little more than skeptical. Seems it would keep the chain on the ring through the rough while the pedals are stationary, but what about lateral movement while you're pedaling aggressively? Great idea still.
[Reply]
  • + 5
 Not fussed on 11 Speed, but check out the DLC Lyricks Smile
  • + 3
 That looks sooo dope! Big Grin


...and I couldn't care less about the 11 speed BS.
[Reply]
  • + 4
 been waiting years to finally say this ---


"it goes to 11 man"


see our link above
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Some people should just man up and ride a single chain ring. Having more chain rings doesn't make that much difference...dirt jumpers survive on single speed and still get by, I ride my Norco with a single 34 teeth chain ring and a 9 speed cassette, works fine. My only issue is that I need a higher gear for going flatout, but I'm just going to go 10 speed once my deraileur and cassette wear out
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Firm believer on the one by system, especially with DW bikes and the chain line. Personally i feel chain line plays a greater role then given credit. 28 tooth widget with 11-34 seems to work great for all mountain purposes. www.widgit.com.au/testimonials.html . because is mounts to the space between the middle and small ring chain line with no spacer on a 68mm shell is optimized about gear 4 or 5. just my two cents. furthermore a lot of torque on that 40ish tooth cog means a lot of blown up rear ends and folded cassettes.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Customer needs and marketing wants make you think something went terribly wrong... Comeon Sramano - good quality dh-capable 5 speed hubgearbox geared to take a small 24 chainring - now! We know you can even do decent autohubs...and no mazac or chewing gum aluminum. Heatreated steelgears in oilbath, quality seals and easy to reach greasefittings.
  • + 1
 What I don't understand is why the benchmark in hubs - Rohloff, have not done a hub that has fewer gears. The Speedhub was designed to cover the 3x9 range and it does, but how about a hub that covers 1x9 or 2x9?

The ONLY disadavantage of a Speedhub is its weight, which is not so bad (it was the same weight as that year's XTR when it came out) but the weight is unsprung and I can really feel the extra 'bang' on big hits. Pinchflats seem to be more common.

The hubs last forever.
  • + 2
 Weight and to many gears - the principal problem of the Rohloff. 1x5 for dh is fine. While am not a weight weenie at all - unsprung weight with a reduced set of gears would make Rohloff viable for dh. But actually I would love to have an automatic gearhub like Sram has. 3 more gears on that - would be fine.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Wow, so many riders with tiny chainrings up front! You guys must ride really tight trails without any room to pedal. I mean, it sounds strange to me, I'm on my 44t ring most of the time, even on many uphills. I clear so much terrain pushing the 11t cog with the big chainring up front. It annoys me how chainrings keep getting smaller, I recently rode a 20 years old, 21 speed Deore LX with a 46t ring in the front and it felt great. They got it right the first time. As for the single ring thing, it sounds good if there is enough range, however a multiple chainring setup has the advantage of allowing quicker gear changes when going from a downhill or flat section to a sudden steep, long climb or vice versa. Just changing from the bigger chainring to the smaller one and going up a few cogs is faster than having to push a lot of cable to get from the smaller cog to the bigger ones. In this case it would be even worse, with ten cogs to go through from top to bottom.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Quite happy with my current 1x10, was happy riding my 2x9 as a 1x9 (not using granny to the point it rusted...), and would be happy to try a 1x11. Innovation is great, as is trying new things even when you know what you love to ride.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 why the hell is it called the xx1 the whole point of it being called xx is that is two tens in roman numerals, so why not just call it the x1???? sram i know where youre going with this but i run a six speed cassette on my downhill bike ratios 36t front and 11-23 rear and i can still ride my 18-19kg beast up quite a few hills i dont see the need for a dinner plate of a cassette... if youre running an enduro bike having narrower ratios on the cassette and a 10-36 rear combined with a 34/36 chainring would do the job just fine and would allow a shorter cage rear mech to be used reducing the chance of rock damage.

seriously bolt your heads on i know that now x0 is ten speed its hard to justify the extra wedge for xx... i think theyre trying to give more gears to try and make people spend the extra but less is probably more in this case... ten speed chains are just about coming easy to find in an emergency i dont know about everyone else i cant be assed with another mtb standard...

between choosing between bike type (hardtail, 4inch,5inch,5.5 inch, 6inch 6.3 inch 7.1 inch and 8 inch) then deciding wheel size (26 inch wheels 29inch or 650b) and then choosing frame material (steel aluminium carbon titanium) drive style(3x9, 3x10, 2x10, 1x10,1x11) and sizing (is it worth sizing up and getting a shorter stem for a more downhilly feel) and how much cash to blow in the thing its going to be nearly impossible to get the bike that you want!!!! when will it all end??
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I did the math and realized that this 32t front and 10-42 cassette is nearly identical as going to the 9-36 and a 28t front. So why not just keep things simpler and keep your rear der, shifter, chain and end up with a lighter set-up and more bb clearance and get the micro drive??

It's cool that sram is testing things out but another drivetrain splinter is a little disconcerting. I think the technology industry can teach us the perils of format wars with every company trying to promote their own version of things...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Something for haters to consider is that Sram doesn't want to make too big of steps from one cog to the next so instead of just making more teeth on a 10 they need to add another. The front derailleur has been the weak link in the drive train for too long and i am glad they are looking to eliminate it. I personally would like a 1x system, but I think they should just make 9 with slightly bigger leaps ending with a 38-40 for the granny. It wouldn't shift quite as smoothly but you wold end up with a bigger range without tighter tolerances. They obviously disagree.
  • + 1
 hmmm....how is it decided that 13% is the ideal jump between cogs?
  • + 1
 I think engineers decided based on the derailleur's path.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 single speed for live lol.Anyone in here running those xo carbon dh cranks if so can u let me know how they are im going to run them fo bmx if i can but im worried they may flex to much off the line. give me some input fellas
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I dig 1x drive train but question the chainline on wider cassettes, especially if your trails put you at the extremes of the cassettes like mine to (usually on the granny end). I also am not really a fan of the close jumps on cassettes. Most of my shifting is done in the front which is like a 45% jump, 13% might shift nice but if your double shifting everything like I often do. I bet a straight 20% jumps or something would be nicer. Plus with 20% jumps you could have less gears and be lighter overal!

I did 32t x 11-34 for a year and while I could climb anything I ran into with it I like have a cruiser gear for mellow days or riding with newbs on steep trails, so I ended up back at 22t-32t again.

That said my next drive train will be 26t x11-36. that gives me exactly all the gears I use on my local trails. And I'll throw a bigger front ring on for traveling if i have to. might go 28t if i can snag one cheep and it clears my frame.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 1x9 is fine for me, never have problems, goes up hills fine, and above all, it's cheap! But I'm not complaining that companies are pushing for better technology, in fact, by doing so they make yesterday's new technology (which is still pretty sound) cheaper for everyone like me who's broke and breaks things. Bring on new technology I say, because it doesn't cost ME a penny to R&D it Wink
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Some ride single speeds... others 3x9, 2x9, 1x9, 3x10, 2x10, 1x10, and now, 1x11.
I like the idea of wide range cassete, but why not make a simple 38x11 10 or even 9 speed cassete?

There are customs cogs, but high production rates, can drop the price for people that actually ride, rather than buy parts (I hope that's 80% of all).
Spiderless cranks and 28/29/30 teeth chainrings are the way to go to have low gear and some speed on flat tracks.

Now, everyone must ride in the same boat:
Frame designers - for pivot location, transmission, and riders (the most important... I think!).

And most important is: people that ride mountains (like doing 3000ft altitude in 10miles), need low gear with bikes weighting like 34lbs, or even more if riders don't want to walk!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The first obvious take is that companies especially large ones like SRAM, Shimano, Fox ect will always be pushing and designing new products and standards thats just the natural progression of things. Sometimes for the better and sometimes not (like "rapidrise" reverse shifting in the late 90's). What I'd like to see, as other posters have mentioned, is for them to keep their 8 and 9 spd compents to give the rest of the riding population a choice in their gearing especially for MTB. Depending on how hard someone rides, I'm interested to see just how well the super narrow 11spd drivetrain setup will hold to repeated punishment. I remember DH racing when 9spd was becoming the new deal and riders snapping chains left and right because of how skinny they were compared to their wider 8spd counterparts.

Lastly, I think internal geared hubs needs more R&D to bring their weight and cost down, nothing better then having smooth working gears all while sporting a bmx like drivetrain on the outside making broken dropouts and derailleurs nothing more then old wives tales.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 I would be really happy if they made 5 or 6 speed rear cassette for x.9 or x.0... Hope they don't make 12 or 13 speed cassettes next year.
  • + 1
 Why? In what possible way would 12 and 13 speed cassettes be to your detriment?
  • + 1
 For DH it means having to double shift or triple shift with 13 speeds OR cutting your cassette down to 5-6 speeds. We don't need tiny steps between cogs we're not roadies!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 this is pretty new and he wasnt testing it here, as he was with me last week with his training bike... i did a quick bike check.... www.i-mtb.com/jerome-clementz-bike-check no 11 speed....hmmmm i forgot to ask him....about that... well i didnt know did anyone?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 sram needs to give up on cassette trains and let he pros(shimano) keep doing what they do best. NO one needs a 32-42 unless you plan on trying to work on track stands. 38t single with 11-36 cassette is all any one needs good mix of low end climbing and speed for down hill
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I love the idea of more range on the rear cassette, but I really only want about six gears, albeit spread out over the widest range possible. Personally I'm really excited about this, the question is, when does it come out, and will it be very expensive? Will I be able to skip 10 speed altogether, as the extra two teeth on the back hasn't suckered me in yet, but a 10-40 that is gonna be worth it.
  • + 1
 It will be very, very expensive, it is going to be at least what XX costs plus a little more. The reason they don't make massive range cassettes with fewer sprockets is that the jumps between the sprockets feel huge and it becomes more of a chore to shift.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I have been running 1x9 (32x11/34) for a little over 2 years on my all mountain/trail bikes. Shoot. I was running 1x8 (36x11/34) on my dh rig and riding that thing everywhere before I realized that I dont need a DH bike to ride 99% of the trails around me. I was running a 34 tooth chainring on my Reign X and ASR5C but since moved to 32 because I am not in the shape I used to be. 1x9 is not just for racers. Everybody has a different fitness level and terrain to contend with. What prompted me to go 1x9 was that I realized that I was always in my big ring (2x9) which was a 34 tooth. I never used my granny (because I hate spinning) and never had the need to for a bigger ring. So I dropped the granny. Some of you seem to think that people jump on what the manufacturers come up with as innovations. But have you thought that maybe these innovations are market driven ? People want something. Somebody builds it. Its market forces that drive manufacturers. They are not going to waste their money innovating products if nobody is interested in buying them. And of course. You will always get band wagoners jumping on the train cause its the new cool trend. That being said. I still havent adopted 10 speed. Sometimes I wish I had on more gear (36). I will certainly entertain the thought of this of this new setup. I know one thing. I will never run more than one ring up front. Well. Maybe when I'm 70 or I move to the Rockies..
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The idea to "mainstream" 1x drivetrains is the right direction for high-end MTB, especially 29ers. A 32t ring with a 11-36 cassette can get most people up most hills in my opinion. Besides, the wagon wheels climb better with lower gears - it's all about keeping momentum. The RD that control chainslap are excellent ideas. I'm running a 1x10 - 34, 11/34. If it's too steep with this setup, then I should be walking it anyway. Going with another gear is the wrong idea, we need more choices in 10 spd cassettes, not having to buy new RD, shifters, rings, etc. Why not a 10/32 or 12/38 or other combinations instead of going to 11spd?
I'd like to see chain guides built into frames. Also, this mentions gripshift for this, I guess we'll get a left sided grip that matches the right shifter? That would be cool.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Might be okay in flat areas but no way would I chose this for riding in the mountains. currently running xo 2 x 10 and love it. Think of the chain slap/slackness from that huge rear sprocket to the small one. I dont think will never gain traction in the market.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Why so much 'hate first, ask questions later?' around here? I thought most mtb'ers were cool... damn.
I agree w/ Kramster and everyone else who sees this as a step in the right direction - FD's do indeed suck, but those of us who prefer long (4+ hrs) rides in high mtns, on heavy bikes, need the option of a spin-able gear every now and then. I've wanted to run 1x for a while now but still need that low gear, because getting off and pushing is lame; this looks like a promising solution.
My concern is chain angle in the low gear (lots o' torque pulling sideways) and the size of cage needed to handle the extreme slack in high gear (look at the 1st pic - it's almost sticking out behind the rear wheel). In mid or low gears that thing's gonna' be hanging mighty low... still, I'm intrigued. Let's see where it goes, I say.
Chill folks, go for a ride.
[Reply]
  • + 4
 Well ..the next Hype arrived !
[Reply]
  • + 1
 If only someone made a freehub body incorporating an overdrive (planetary gear box).
If only reality re-designed was available to the UK...

Why does nobody make this it is not rocket science? (but is also not cheap..).
[Reply]
  • + 0
 I'm starting a new company that is currently working on a 4 x 12 x 47. Yes, that's an additional gear in the middle of the chainstay. Why not? I figure if the Big Guys are coming with up more reasons to keep the cash flow going, year after year, why can't the Small Guys come in and create something just as ludicrous? In fact, that's the name of my company: The Small Guys.

My system will have two rear derailleurs, instead of one rear and one front. I am also working on a design that will place three derailleurs on the front fork, two more on the seatpost, and a battery-powered hydraulic shifting system with attached neon lights to let everyone know that you have something cool on your bike so that you can ride around the trailhead parking lot waiting for someone to ask you "What's that?", giving you the opportunity to show off your POS system and talk for 10 minutes, instead of riding your bike. That's what Jones Bikes were made for, right? Trailhead conversation starters with zero functionality.
  • + 2
 Nailed it.

Obviously the negative votes are from the poseurs who spend most of their MTB-related time posing, such as being bench-racers at the trailhead parking lot. In Iowa.

"Yeah that's right. I have the new SRAM 1x11 setup. It's the pinnacle of ALL MOUNTAIN riding. What? What do I ride? Oh I usually do a flattish 25 minute loop. No, just once. No, just once a week. It's how I get away from my wife. Yeah, that's my Porsche Cayenne. What? I'm an orthodontist. That's right. I make teenagers miserable for a living. I've got ten different MTBs. Sometimes it's hard to know just which one I'll ride today."
[Reply]
  • + 2
 When is DT going to market and produce that 9 tooth rear we saw on a couple World Cup DH bikes a while ago? That is the drivetrain upgrade I'll make next. Well, I hope.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Well it's become a joke now, I guess it wuill cost an arm and a leg. I think I'm going back to Shimano after atleast 10 years of £RAM. 9 gears is plently, if not go to the gym and get fit.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Dont the Beatles need a new remix and remaster on all their stuff? or maybe Dark Side of the Moon so we all have to buy a new format? I'd rather keep 2 x 8.
  • + 1
 like MP3 ...lol improvement? choice? or just more ways to sell you the same old same old.....
  • + 1
 you forgot remastering the Star wars movies
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I personally do not agree with xx1, why do you need them. I'm same as a lot of guys out there 9 is enough which i have on my bike, some times even that's to much. I think 8 is enough for me
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Is 11 speed really needed? I know that we have said the same thing about 8 and 9 speed, but it really seems to be getting a bit much. I never had a complaint about 8 speed and was happy with it, I didn't really see an improvement when 9 speed forced 8 speed off the top of the hill, but I have never had a problem with 9 gears either. Yes I broke a few 9 speed chains, but that was more from user error than "thin chains".

Before long I will be the old curmudgeon because I am not upgrading and staying on top of all the advances. I like what I got and I will ride it till I drop or can't get replacement parts.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 i think this is pointless, why not run a 1x8 or 1x9 with either a 36 tooth chainring or 34 tooth chainring, personally i think 1x11 is way too much, the chain would be super thin and i don't think it would last long imo.
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Dear mountain biker, whoever you are, I guess you would like to ride better, whatever that means to you - brake better, corner faster, pedal harder and longer. 1x? drive is a good motivation to become fitter, but this bit up there will not do it for you, it will just make it easier for you to remain who you are, but on 1 ring setup instead of 2x or 3x that you have now... your bike will change, you won't. Seeing a guy like Jerome up there, should inspire you to take the path of physical and mental training they practice, not be inspired to buy products they are given to be seen on. Because they won't make you faster... they will just make you spend more money
[Reply]
  • + 0
 This is a joke, right? The quote by a _marketing_ guy at Special Ed is a further joke, right?

People are really that insecure that they have to run 1x___ in order to feel like a "real" MTB rider?

More "innovation" to impress the poseur gang and drive the cost upward and drive the working-well-parts into the oblivion of "outdated".

I bet this will be huge with the folks who do 30 minute rides after a 1-hour Pose-Up in the trailhead parking lot. Not really very useful to those of us who routinely ride for 5 hours or more with 3+ hours of climbing.

What exactly is wrong with a front der and a little ring? Is it something that makes men and boys feel like their penis is under-sized?
  • + 4
 Man...somebody is insecure about his little ring. Nobody cares man, ride whatever works for you. 1 ring, 2 rings, 3 rings...it's all mountain biking. If you think it's useless technology, don't buy it. You probably though full suspension bikes were just a fad too.
  • - 9
 You're funny, little guy. Your sense of humor is easily understood by 5th graders because it's at their level. IS TOO!
  • + 1
 Man...your life must be awesome.
  • - 4
 But... but... but... you're busy trying to prove how YOUR life is so awesome. Why would you care about MINE?
[Reply]
  • + 3
 40T Cog!... This is the first time that i saw a cog bigger than the ChainRing...
  • + 1
 The crappy UBI small-small chain install method just became obsolete, even though it was already outdated.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 My trail bike runs on 1x1 setup. Works just fine. My front chainring is 32T and rear is 18T. I still enjoy riding. So i don't care about 8 or 9 or 10 or even 11 speeds. Just go RIDE.....
[Reply]
  • + 1
 32 chain ring is great for pretty much anything appart from trials. I use one on my dh, 4x and xc bikes more than anything else.
[Reply]
  • + 0
 I think this is the future, I'm only riding 2x10 cause I can't get a 1x10 up the hill in multi day events like Trans Provence. Can't wait to get all that rubbish from my bike and make it clean and simple.
[Reply]
  • - 1
 Yet another PR exercise designed to relieve us of our money on the latest 'must have, can't live without item' Why don't they stop fannying about and just go for a single ring 27 gear set up. How many people actually use both the 32/34/36 sprocket AND the 11/12/13 sprockets. Not many. All I can see is misaligned chains, and a move in a few years time, back to 6/7 speeds because you don't actually need so many gears. Only the unfit, the lard arses and the gadget braggers want this, and of course the PR men.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Good idea, I'd consider that set up. Although I would rather have a large range 9 speed. Not phased about the 13percent optimal increase
[Reply]
  • + 0
 Amazing it's taken companies so long to catch on to 1x drive trains. I've been running a 1x9 set-up with a chainguide, 34t and an 11-34 cassette for years on all my XC bikes. Gotta be in shape to push the big ring!!!
  • - 5
 Wow. You must be a REAL man. 1-by on ALL YOUR CROSS COUNTRY BIKES? Gosh! You're my hero!

I bet you never ride.
  • + 1
 34t is not the 'big' ring - that's more like the 'middle' ring.
  • + 5
 Ha...so far I've been lucky enough to get out everyday this week. (I'd be happy to send you the Strava details of each ride, d-bag.)

The trails I ride start with a 1300' climb....and then you start the ride. So yes, pushing the big ring.

And yes, 1x9 on the Stumpjumper Evo I currently ride. Same on the Enduro, other Enduro, Cannondale Jekyl and Cannondale Rush I had before it. Only one at a time unfortunately. Gotta save money to spend on the big fun bikes.

I, along with a lot of other people have also been putting short stems and wide DH bars on little bikes for years as well. It's nice that the industry is now catching on and selling bikes spec'd like the people who work in bike shops build their personal bikes.
  • + 4
 iamamodel...I wouldn't know, I only have 1 ring. Smile
  • - 5
 Wow! You're a trendsetter!

Some of us have been on short stems & wide bars for at least a decade. But I'm sure you were first!
  • + 3
 Right...I must have missed in my comment above where I said I was the first and exactly the date of the first time I strapped a set of DH bars on an XC bike. You sir...are a moron.
  • - 3
 I love when obviously stupid people try to play the Intellectual Superior.

I'm not sure what you are if I'm a "moron." But it would be something sub-moron for sure.

I was playing with your bragging on being in the "vanguard" or "forefront" or "progressive" end of things when you suggested you have been setting your bikes up with short stem and wide bar, as if you have been "onto something" that everyone else misses. Clearly since you don't know me and I don't know you and I have been running short stem and wide bar since 2001, you didn't really lead the pack here and you didn't influence me and so you're not that original or visionary.

I'm sure your 1-by-___ system proves you're a bad-azz though. Funny thing about that, lots of us were running 1-by-___ 10 years ago too. Some of us even ran... no, seriously... SINGLESPEED! Good gawd, what crazy honches we are!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Can I just stick to a 1x6?
No crazy jumping full of gears derailleur, that will start to creak and jump like a wild bull after a few weeks...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 there is nothing wrong with my Saint 9 speed set up. It does not skip and is quit. i do not need to drop 2K on an 11 speed nightmare
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I always thought the 38T/11-32 setup on my hardtail Trailbike was best... I would run this setup on a big bike, it will accelerate like mad!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Say you hate 11 speed, instant up vote. Sarcasm, instant down vote from all of North America.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 next year XXX, it all the rave 3 rings on the front 8 on the back, it will change the way you ride for ever, -1 you'll need a bash guard.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 11 speed in't enough, i've been waiting for 12 speed. Come on bike companies step it up.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 only reason they do this is because they can if they get bad feedback then they throw it out and try something different till people say wow thats great
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I roll with a 36t chainring and a 9 speed 11-36 cassette on my trail bike and am yet to find a hill that I can't ride up. 9 speed is where its at!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Did SRAM decide to hire the dude who engineered Rapidrise, and the XT integrated shifter/lever?
[Reply]
  • - 1
 SRAM is just brilliant, I love that stuff! First they gave us 2x10 setup as they felt that more and more gravity oriented riders were taking off big rings and replacing them with bashrings. A threat to 3x? became an opportunity to introduce a new line of products where you gladly threw in 10sp to make a potential client feel that he gets something more. A fear that client could get - will I be able to get same gear range, was taken care of by wider range cassette, and larger granny. But new line had a threat as well, your front derailleurs could become obsolete as people could get seduced to run 1x? for XC and AM given the wider range. So now you found the way to further capitalize on 1x? - from the point of view of marketing and public relations I congratulate you greatly!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 iv'e decided im going to work on a 1x50 system and sell the rights to the highest bidder.... by the time ive perfected it it'll be on the cards anyway.. hahahaha
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I love the idea. I'm already thinking about disabling my front derailer as I don't even use it. Just not so sure about 11 speeds. Sounds like a maintenance headache.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Will not buy 11 speed, it causes as many problems as solves, would like a sealed drive though?
SRAM sealed drive please, If you dont know how to do it I can show you?
  • + 0
 Shimano will have to develop one first, then maybe SRAM can copy it.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 With that "pizza pie" large cog in the back you need to be careful in a crosswind. Try getting your hand in there to get the chain out when it drops on the inside.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Im rolling a 2x8 and have no intentions of ditching my bail out gear period! It seems the gear ratios are about whos got the bigest dick!
  • + 3
 I have the biggest dick.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 great idea in theory, but those shifting jumps are going to be huge to get from 10 - 42..... I would question how smooth that would be for shifting
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Just got a 10 speed and now there's a 11 but was just as happy with my 9 for DH ... 11 would be nice for FR, I think ?? Frown
[Reply]
  • + 2
 i bet there will be a £400 price tag on that rear cassette lol
[Reply]
  • + 1
 My 1 by 9 XT set up suits me down to the ground... No need for a flying saucer of a cassette out back either :L
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Man, riding a bicycle these days sure is getting complicated.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Does anyone yet know what type of bottom bracket the cranks for the XX1 will be compatible with?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The idea seems awesome.... More importantly where do I get some of those socks?!?!?!?!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 will it still work once its had a month of winter riding and is full of gritty slop?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I remember 20 years ago with 46-36-26 and 8 speed rear 11/34! was really fantastic for all conditions!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 OMFG... There definitely was some God when i chose 1x9 combination for my trail bike.. And i wont change it to anything.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 LOL...I remember that. At least that was funny. This is just stupid and not funny.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 i spy with my little eye a dlc coated lyrik hahaha
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Campagnolo has been doing 11 speed for a while....
  • + 1
 Yup, it's noted in the article that 11 speed itself isn't new.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 does this just exemplify how terrible sram chainrings & front derailleurs are? dumping them altogether? Wink
[Reply]
  • + 1
 The way i see it if your below a 1 to 1 gearing ratio you may as well walk. It'll be faster xD
[Reply]
  • + 1
 this is way to much complication just to get ride of a front derailler
[Reply]
  • + 2
 I WANT THAT CHAIN RING!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Just pedal harder
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Real men run 1x1
  • + 1
 Very true. My MaxMax DJ Bike, my daughter snatched it, she rides single speed to school and back and just about everywhere up and down. My Absolute SX single speed, my son snatched it and rides it everywhere. No fuss, low maintenance and single speed feels just more efficient and more direct. So I ride 1x9 dh and 2x5 road bikes. My old Shimano 600 is just so much better than todays crap - buttersmooth and quiet riding and lasts very very well. I dont care how many cogs - useless - if the quality bearings and hard wearing materials are not there. Oh and shifting used to be much better.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 wow , 11. I won't need front derailleur with these
[Reply]
  • + 1
 That's six more than I need or want.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I'd like to see 4 chainrings up front.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 All I ask for is a 9-36T 9speed cassette!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 WHERE'S MY DAMN BASH GUARD???
  • + 2
 We expect the group to include some sort of chain guide (possibly under the XX1 banner, possibly not), but it probably won't include proper bash guard. It will more likely look like one of the lightweight, upper slider-only guides that are available now.
  • + 1
 thanks for the reply mike!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I want an XO3 and a super large rear wheel...and a propeller!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 hammerschimdt with 11 cassette?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 drive trains confuse me!!
[Reply]
  • - 3
 At the end of the day its to many gears. if i have to press the shifter more than twice then we have a problem... imagine a car that shifted twice because it has to many gears.... you just wouldn't buy it ok... a car can roll very slowly and go in excess of 100mph with what 5 6 7 gears?..... sram shimano.. only want your moneh!!
  • + 11
 A car engine can pull from 1000 rpm to around 5000 rpm, a difference of 500%, humans can pedal comfortably from around 65 to 110 rpm, a difference of less than 100%.

It turns out engines and legs are different...who knew?
  • + 2
 @labman82 - It's actually less gears than the two chain ring setups that most riders are running, and none of the useless overlap! On top of that, the range is actually wider than some of the current double ring systems.
  • + 1
 hahahha dont bash... i have an optimal rpm and when i go over it i change gear.. no different from any vehicle with gears.. but cars and motor bikes don't have a issues like i do where i have to change twice because they are geared well.... what they should do is build a compact 6/7 speed so it can shift as smooth as a 10 sp...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 take note on the reverse shock on ont he cannon dale made by rockshox!
  • + 1
 It would make sense that entire bike be outfitted with rockshox/sram since they are probably using it as a test mule. I wouldn't be surpised if they were testing a lot more than a drivetrain and shock. You should also note that it doesn't look like it has a travel adjust feature like the fox shock that comes stock.
  • + 1
 ...and the DLC Lyric Big Grin
[Reply]
  • + 1
 That large cog looks like a fuckin pie plate slapped on there!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 ive got an idea. 12 x 1 gearing system Razz
[Reply]
  • + 1
 I think they should have just left it at 9 speed
  • + 4
 They should have just left it at 8spd... no 7spd was fine. Actually, I wish they left it at 6spd. I don't like indexed shifting either, so give me a non-indexed 5spd setup =) So is the price of new technology.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 wow lot of response........dump the 9 tooth ring and keep it 10 speed.
[Reply]
  • - 1
 so...there'll be a XO1? cause xx is stupid expensive!
  • + 1
 this stuff tends to work its way down if people like it.
  • + 2
 I would imagine so. like taletotell said, it's nearly always trickle down.
  • + 1
 so what is the limit to a cassette 15 16 20 and what about chain limits and what if your just a fatass, 6 speed starts to sound pretty good !
  • + 2
 I just decided to stop reading and go riding to wear out the gears I have and worry about it later. Way to go SRAM, whatever it was you were trying to accomplish. A front derailleur is like a transfer case on a 4X4, sometimes you need 4 Low!
  • + 1
 Did some math. I'd need more 50 teeth on the back to keep my 36 in the front and have the equivalent of a granny. I like my 36-11 combo and I need my granny. No go for me. I would love to run a single in the front, but it looks like that won't happen yet.
[Reply]
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2014. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv14 0.126564
Mobile Version of Website