Source: SRAMSince its successful and celebrated introduction two years ago, SRAM’s popular single-ring 1X™ drivetrains featuring X-SYNC chainrings continue to gain popularity. In an effort to provide consumers more choice SRAM has licensed this valuable, precision-based technology to two industry partners. This December we formally signed two license agreements for the technology, one with Canadian-based Chromag, the other with the Accell Group. Both of these top-tier industry suppliers will be manufacturing their own versions of SRAM’s X-SYNC rings, to be distributed through their own networks. Both suppliers will continue to use and support all SRAM 1X drivetrain components in addition to this license.
This narrow-wide design (
also referred to as thick-thin) is an original SRAM technology, designed and engineered to be paired with matching SRAM components to ensure proper function. Imitation rings not manufactured to proper SRAM specifications may result in rapid wear and poor mud clearance, both of which may result in dropped chains. SRAM has filed numerous patent applications on narrow-wide / thick-thin tooth geometry. Our German engineering teams invented narrow-wide / thick-thin chain retention for bicycles and we continue to improve on it. We strongly believe consumers deserve both choice and design integrity in the products they purchase. SRAM reserves the right to enforce its intellectual property in all matters relating to X-SYNC.
About Accell:
Accell Group N.V. (“Accell Group”) focuses internationally on the mid-range and higher segments of the market for bicycles, bicycle parts and accessories and fitness equipment. Accell has leading positions in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy, France, Finland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. Accell Group’s best known brands are Batavus (NL), Sparta (NL), Loekie (NL), Ghost (DE), Haibike (DE), Hercules (DE), Winora (DE), Raleigh and Diamondback (UK, US, CA), Lapierre (FR), Tunturi (FI), Atala (IT), Redline (US) and XLC (international). For more information visit: www.accell-group.comAbout Chromag Bikes:
Chromag is a manufacturer of high end machined bicycle components based in Whistler, British Columbia, Canada. In addition to a full range of quality components, Chromag also manufactures an extensive line of steel hardtails. Being a smaller company gives Chromag the ability to move quickly and bring the most relevant components to market with a heightened sense of detail and creativity. For more information visit: www.chromagbikes.comwww.sram.com
X-sync has always been patented. The reason (I believe) that the race face NW rings as well as others were okay is because while they follow the same concept, they're different enough that they aren't covered by the patent.
This article is saying that SRAM is actually licensing their design to these two companies so that they can make rings that are exactly the same as the SRAM rings.
So, with Narrow Wide, Raceface, Wolftooth, e13, etc aren't very big companies. And, I would imagine that SRAM would need to go after them individually and prove that the patent was being violated. The biggest benefit to SRAM is that Shimano can't produce a 1 by drivetrain without producing something very similar which gives them a competitive advantage. And, if Shimano went the route of licensing the patent, SRAM could jack up the cost.
Another thing about all of the small companies doing narrow wide. Most of them are 10 speed compatible. Which in itself might be enough to eek by. And... while the 1x11 drivetrain looks damn sexy. There is hardly an advantage to running a 1x10 with some lower gearing provided by a General Lee or equivalent.
In this case it wasn't even a new idea in the cog world, just new to bikes so very little r&d. They had a huge jump on everyone else, and if they couldn't capitalize on it because they charged a butt load ($100) so nobody bought it then I have no sympathy.
competition spurs innovation, not monopolies on basic concepts.
What I mean is, their costs seem like they would have been the same, even if RF stole the concept, because either way they have the same costs for drafting, testing, etc. I think sram just tries to ask for more because when people buy 1x11 they tend to just get the whole kit, not worrying about the price of any part alone.
This business plan worked for sram until 1up made it likely most people would go 1x10, and be shopping for a front ring all by its self. Suddenly sram was going to lose market share and they had 3 choices: innovate, lose money, or litigate.
They chose the third, and given the pattern I'd expect to see them try to take down 1up if they can figure out how.
The reason sram will not be able to touch RF, e13, etc, is because sram didn't invent it. I bet theirs works better, but not better enough to make me want to buy one, unless they cost the same.
Is it just me, or do you think thick/thin rings are too expensive? Last e13 ring I bought, a year agoor so, was about 25 quid. Now they want 45 for thick/thin. It think that in itself is a joke. I want one, but not enough to pay double. Hopefully the price will come down closer to that of a normal ring in the next few months.
It's all business when it comes down to it. It's not about what is fair or what is not. It's about leverage and profitability. People won't try to sell a product if they think it won't be profitable. They will not go after a competitor if it does not pass a cost benefit analysis. And small companies won't stop producing narrow wide independently (AMEN) until they are hit with a cease and desist order from the court. Shit, I wouldn't.
So, which is the best NON-SRAM narrow wide. I like RF, but was leaning toward e-13 because of the variable spacing. Besides that they all seem like the same shit. Thoughts?
What can be said however is that SRAM, if granted a patent, will then have open to it the possibility of patent monetization; that is to generate income from the patents granted. This news is the first step in that process where they have licensed the technology they are seeking a patent over to others within the industry.
History shows that monetizing a patent is a far more successful policy that attempting to generate revenue from patent infringement penalties (in this case that means from the likes of RF and others). It is far more common for costs to outweigh benefits. Just ask Specialized.
Meanwhile, mechanics are working
overtime to deal with srams latest timely disc brake recall debacle.
velonews.competitor.com/2014/01/bikes-and-tech/mechanics-respond-to-brake-recall-ahead-of-u-s-nationals_312545
What happens is Canyon makes the strive and does the knuckle box design better than DB. Rather than improve on the knucklebox DB just sues to keep them out of their market.
Patents stifle innovation, pure and simple. How many software developers can afford to pay the patent trolls so they can bring new ideas to market? Only the ones who work for the big companies like google or apple. Patents just keep the big guys on top. More so now than ever since to build a phone you have to use a million patent parts.
RS/AVID/SRAM does the KISS principle well, but they seem to be having trouble with the other aspects of being a cool company.
@taletotell - Yeah, I don't think their different divisions have the same quality in engineering. I am completely over loyalty at this point.
Brakes = shimano, Drivetrain = sram, fork = pike, shock = float (although I dream of a DB Air), etc etc...
www.raceface.com/components/rings/rings/single-ring-narrow-wide
ps. Narrow Wide comes in a 30T - yes please!
To any Amish who were offended by that crude joke I just want to apologize and say "HEY, GET OFF THE INTERNET! WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS IS? RUMSPRINGA? Oh,it is rumspringa? Okay, cool.
-Ian
thanks,
jon
wonder if these bikes will also have their own licensed components...?
Wow another bike industry "Innovation"
Nope, I'm not seeing that with my Works Components rings on two bikes ridden all summer and now through the hideously boggy UK winter, and still no chain dropped and cannot see any relevant wear on the chainring that's any different to any other chainring I've ever had, including expensive SRAM. Mud clearance is same as any other in my experience.
But besides, it the chainring wears, buy another for £35. Still a fraction of the cost of buying an XX1 crank to use SRAM's proprietary BCD chainring (that still costs more).
Year 1897.
Looks similar