Cassettes with cogs as big as the large chainring on an old triple crankset have only been a thing since 2012, and while some riders are still unconvinced that a single chainring and cassette with a massive spread is best for them, OneUp is taking things a few steps further. The Squamish, B.C., company's 50-tooth Shark Cog and Shark Cage kit, which are only sold and designed to be used in combination with each other, give your Shimano eleven-speed drivetrain a 19% jump in range. In fact, OneUp says that the Shark Cog creates an 11 - 50 spread cassette with the widest range available when using a standard, non-XD freehub body.
The $125 USD kit includes the 50-tooth aluminum Shark Cog, an 18-tooth nickel-plated hardened steel cog, and the required high-offset Shark Cage for Shimano Shadow+ eleven-speed rear derailleurs. The large cog and derailleur cage are both available in either gray or OneUp's customary green color. Did you know that adult great white sharks have about fifty functioning teeth at any given time? The more you know...
www.oneupcomponents.comShark Cog Details:
• Spread: 11, 13, 15, 18, 21, 24, 28, 32, 37, 42, 50
• Material: 7075-T6 aluminum (50t), nickel-plated hardened steel (18t)
• Compatibility: XT M8000 11 - 42 tooth cassette only
• Freehub requirement: standard freehub driver
• Cassette range improvement: 19%
• Colors: grey or green
Shark Cage Details:
• Pulley offset: 50% more than stock
• Compatibility: Shimano Shadow+ 11-speed derailleurs
• Crash replacement cages available separately
• Colors: grey or green
• MSRP: $125 USD for kit
The massive 50-tooth cog is so large that it makes the 42-tooth XT cog right next to it look small in comparison, but the Shark Cog wouldn't be possible if OneUp hadn't designed a new derailleur cage that bolts to Shimano Shadow+ 11-speed derailleurs. This is because the stock Shimano cage puts the upper pulley in a position that's designed to work with a 42-tooth cog, not the much larger 50-tooth Shark Cog, so OneUp's answer was to simply reposition the upper pulley wheel to provide 50% more offset relative to the cage's pivot point. The pulley wheel's new position is much more off-center of the derailleur cage's pivot (much like what SRAM has done on their 1X derailleurs), and it allows the pulley wheel to move further down and out of the way to clear 50-tooth cog when the cage is pulled forward by chain tension. And no, you don't need a different B-tension screw, and you'll likely find that you won't even need to dial your stock screw in all the way.
That isn't all, though. The upper pulley wheel's drastically offset position also means that it comes up closer to the small, 11-tooth cog when you're at the opposite end of the cassette. This provides more chain wrap and more security, but it also should help with shift speed at both the high and low ends of the range.
The gigantic 50-tooth cog weighs 92 grams, and the OneUp 18-tooth cog comes in at 24 grams, making for a weight increase of 73 grams over the 19-tooth (24 gram) and 17-tooth (19 gram) stock cogs that are getting ditched. OneUp's Shark Cage weighs 6 grams more than the stock, medium length XT cage, so you're looking at a total weight jump of 79 grams.
Installation and SetupDo you have the tools and knowledge to remove and re-install a cassette? If so, you also have the ability to install the Shark Cog and 18-tooth steel cog onto your XT M8000 11 - 42 tooth cassette.
The 50-tooth Shark Cog sits right up against the back of the stock 42-tooth Shimano cog, so you simply slide that down into your freehub and then follow it up with the two Shimano carrier clusters (42, 37, 32, and 28, 24, 21). Now, instead of dropping on the separate 19 and 17-tooth Shimano cogs, you slide the OneUp 18-tooth steel cog and the stock Shimano spacer before the final three Shimano cogs. You've just ditched the stock 19 and 17 in order to run OneUp's 18 and 50-tooth cogs. Easy.
Your large cog was a 42 and it's now a 50, and that extra size means that you're going to need to either install a new chain or put a few links into the one you're already using. OneUp would prefer you to do the former, but adding a few links of chain is a pretty easy task. If your chain isn't long enough, and it probably won't be if you leave it at its original length, you risk causing some real carnage (a shark attack?) and incurring a hefty repair bill if you bottom-out your bike's suspension with the chain in the 50-tooth cog and it's not long enough to allow for that to happen. For this reason, always check chain length at bottom-out and when it's in the largest cog.
Installing the Shark derailleur cage is a bit more intimidating, but it's something that can be done in only a few minutes. It's best to do the cage before installing a new chain so you don't end up fighting its spring tension, and take note of which pulley goes on which end of the cage.
It also should be said that while Shimano generally remains quiet when it comes to this topic, you can bet your last eleven-speed quick link that they don't want you messing with their stuff. That doesn't mean that you shouldn't do it or that the OneUp conversion doesn't work well, but only that there are likely some polite Japanese engineers groaning when they see this. Oh, and you can forget about any sort of warranty on the derailleur.
I did run into one setup note that's worth mentioning: I installed a 34-tooth oval chainring with the Shark 50T Sprocket kit, and the drive-side crank does have to be spaced out a bit more than optimal in order for the ring to clear the Ibis Ripley's chainstay. This made for a chainline that was pretty out of alignment, enough so that the chain would drop off of the 42 tooth Shimano cog when I pedaled backward even though it was one in from being the largest cog. Interestingly, the chain wouldn't drop off the Shark Cog when rotating the cranks in reverse, despite it being even more out of alignment with the chainring. This is because the shift gates on the Shimano cog encourage the chain to drop off in order to quicken shift speed when going into a harder gear, whereas OneUp's cog features a different design. This foible is purely down to the chainline of my test bike.
PerformanceI wonder what mountain bikers would say if you could travel back in time by a decade or so and tell them that 50-tooth cogs would be a thing in 2016? Would they call you an idiot, or would they say that they couldn't wait for a drivetrain that offers nearly as wide of a range as a two-ring setup but also one that I'd argue is much less complicated and refined? I think that it'd likely be split pretty evenly because, just like today, there are riders who aren't looking for the easiest possible gearing and enjoy pushing themselves on climbs, and there are just as many (or more) riders who just want to get up those same climbs.
I fall into the first category, so the idea of a 50-tooth cog appealed to me about as much as running a triple-ring crankset does, but then I turned down my attitude a bit and actually thought about it.
OneUp's 50-tooth cog might sound silly large, but you can easily manage your gearing by going with a larger chainring so that your easiest gear comes close to resembling what you had before, but the opposite end of the cassette becomes taller. So that's what I did. I went from a 30-tooth chainring to a 34-tooth oval ring, which meant that I instantly started using different cogs on the XT cassette than I would have otherwise. You can keep using the same chainring you had on pre-Shark Cog, but it makes far more sense to factor in the price of a new ring so as to adjust your drivetrain to the new, wider ratio.
The eight tooth shift from the stock 42-tooth cog to the 50-tooth OneUp cog is a big enough jump that my legs didn't really like that much. It wasn't the shift itself, mind you, but the actual eight tooth difference that just felt a bit odd to me when it came to matching my cadence and effort. Also, the larger chainring means that the gearing is obviously harder when the chain is in the 42-tooth cog, which is something that saw me make that eight tooth jump up on more than a few occasions while making my way up my steep local climbs.
Are you a numbers guy? For reference, the final jump on a SRAM XX1 cassette is six teeth (36 to 42), and the last jump on the pre-OneUp'd XT cassette is only five teeth (37 to 42). This means that the percentage of change between two largest cogs for the XX1 cassette is 16.66%, and the gap for the stock XT cassette is 13.51%. The OneUp'd XT cassette sees a much larger jump of 19.047%. Another number to keep in mind is the percentage spread between the highest and lowest cogs: the Shimano XT 11 - 42 is 281.81%, a SRAM XX1 10 - 42 and 320%, and the OneUp'd XT 11 - 50 cassette offers a wider 354.54% range.
Considering the Shark 50T Sprocket Kit? Decide if you want the 50-tooth as a "Holy shit, I'm dead" bailout gear and keep something close to your original chainring size, or get out that gear calculator and find out what chainring best suits you and your terrain.
Somewhat odd feeling gearing jump aside, the shift up to and off of the Shark Cog is remarkably quick and drama free. I was expecting some lag time - all of these conversions seem to be about 80 or 85% as quick as a stock setup - but the Shark 50T Sprocket kit is better than that. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that a lot of riders might never notice the difference in shift speed if they were to do a blind test, which is pretty remarkable given the eight tooth difference that the chain has to span. This is surely down to the Shark Cage and the offset upper pulley wheel that provides clearance but also locates the pulley in just the right spot height-wise. The setup even plays nice under high pedaling loads.
And speaking of high pedaling loads, the 34-tooh chainring and 50-tooth cog provided me with the gearing to get up anything that looked even remotely climbable. If you like to challenge yourself on steep, technical climbs and take pride in staying clipped-in when your riding buddies end up on their feet, the Shark 50T Sprocket kit could be ideal so long as you pair it with the correct size chainring.
Pinkbike's Take: | Put aside for a moment the idea of such a large cog being only for riders who just need to work on their fitness, even if there might be some truth in that. Am I unhappy with a stock Shimano 11 - 42 cassette? Not in the slightest, and I personally don't feel the need for an easier gear, but remember that the Shark Cog and Shark Cage allow a rider to greatly increase their gearing spread, and not only their low range but also their high range if they decide to go with a suitably larger chainring. This could be a real benefit to a rider with greatly varied terrain. - Mike Levy |
Visit the feature gallery for high resolution and additional images
I think that we have became hostages of XC racing. When will those guys realize that AM/Trail/Enduro MTB != XC racing. We do not need 11 or 12 tight gears, we need wide range. We do not need complicated and pricey XTR Di, a gearbox is just fine. And unlike XC racers we do have rear suspension, so the unsprung weight really matters.
Why not Shimano? Well, why would you promote long life drivetrains when people are buying your expendable parts frequently
"If you're having shifting problems I feel bad for you son, I got 99 problems and my 2x ain't one."
www.pinkbike.com/photo/13049543
And what are the advantages besides having everything out of the way?
The market will go where most money are to be made. I am sure after they exploid 1x, 2x electronic etc. it may end up with gear box. Maybe gearbox and electric motors will be interchangeable.
Having ridden any standard system from 5 speed rear to 1x11, the 1x11 is the most primitive with huge great jumps. 2x11 Campagnolo is the best have ridden and the most intuitive/efficient shifter set up.
Seems to me the Alphine could be redeveloped around a hollowtech crank and put in the middle of the bike where it belongs.
It is all about maintenance and repair part sales and has nothing to do with derailleurs being better.
In addition to a single chain line, narrower and stronger rear hub and wheel every one forgets the chain could be dumped for a far lighter kevlar belt... and yes they can sort out any issues with the belt too.
Why go to the effort of a faster stronger longer wearing system when it is so easy to convince the majority of riders that the current lucrative high maintenace systems are better?
www.nicolai-bicycles.com/shop/index.php/bike/ion16-27-5-komplettbike-tech-line.html 14.3kg
That's approx the weight difference between gearbox and 1x
You can make a detailed list with 1x components weight vs gearbox weight but you will reach the same 2kg value I suppose. Just imagine you replace a 250g cassette + 250g derailleur with a gearbox (with housing and oil) + a rear cog and eventually a chain tensioner. If you consider downhill bikes then the gearbox advantages decrease even more.
Gearbox replacing current drivetrains is just not viable.
I would love that someone proves me wrong in a few years, I also want to be able to buy better bikes. But I don't think gearbox is an option. Sorry to ruin your dreams.
And I created the account to be able to read the negative comments if you were wondering.
Common sense of engineering then would take into account the location of the weight and a couple of other factors.
You might have different criterias for choosing a bike and I can accept that.
But from what I've seen the norm for 160mm travel bikes is 14kg for aluminium and 12kg for carbon and 11 speed range is considered acceptable. Then 1.5kg is too much added weight.
And I think you won't decrease this difference too much if you decrease the range supported by the gearbox.
Just compare P1.9xr and P1.12 (the table at the end) : pinion.eu/en/p1-9xr-gearbox
Not joking: the added weight from a gearbox does not produce additional power nor aids the efficiency.
The weight difference will obviously not decrease if you decrease the range, but it will decrease if you increase it.
I tested the Nicolai that you mentioned on a parking lot and it's not the added weight that I noticed first, but rather where it was located. All in all it's not that bad.
Yup, it's overkill for you so clearly it's overkill for everyone else out there since we all ride the SAME trails.
I just hope these new cassettes along with the SRAM eagle group drive down the prices of existing 11 speed cassettes.
You guys are going to lose your collective minds when SRAM releases its 12 speed 10-50 cassette later this year. I predict top comment will be "Why would I pay $xxx for this when I can just convert my existing 11 speed to a 50t with OneUp?"
Full photos here:
www.pinkbike.com/u/oneupcomponents/album/Shark
Full range comparison here:
ep1.pinkbike.org/p4pb13277597/p4pb13277597.jpg
What happen if you slightly backpedal on the 50 cog?
Great job OneUp! I still have to buy radr cage damn it!
www.pinkbike.com/buysell/1931373/?directtofirstphoto
1)You don't have enough range in your gearing.
2)You don't want the "problems" of a front derailleur.
3)You instead want your rear derailleur almost dragging on the ground.
My head hurts.
Not recommended for use on 26ers.
That said, I just installed the XT 1x11 and am running an Absolute Black 32t. I plan on getting stronger and moving to a 34t to get more top end rather than an easier gear. For now, anyway.
It's hilarious when I hear these weight complaints about a cassette that weighs 100g more yet is mounted on 2000g wheels with 1200g tires. It's just dumb.
If you need that big of a cog, stick with 2x10, you're not gaining anything with single ring setup like this.
'' Shimano XT 11 - 42 is 381.81%, a SRAM XX1 10 - 42 and 420%, and the OneUp'd XT 11 - 50 cassette offers a wider 454.54% range. ''
Ultra long cage derailleur? No thanks.
www.pinkbike.com/news/zerode-taniwha.html
This put me off from 9spd til recently... 9spd might be a nice drivetrain(now), but IMO(and others I know), 8spd still the best!
The fix ?
Some one will come up with the DCD Mk2 and call it's innovation.
It's hilarious to read the comments about these large cogs as each successive increase gets such vitriol. Then everybody buys them. The fact is they work.
I run one of their 45T setups now on my 11spd XTR setup and they work great. I to like to stay on my seat and could careless if walking is faster. I am not hiking for a reason. My knees are trashed.
You guys should be happy I am not on an E-bike right?
I'm sure a few years ago I saw a prototype trials bike disc brake with a bloody great disc brake track actually attached the the rim of the wheel with a conventional disc brake caliper mounted up near the tyre for extra braking power. Sooner or later we're going to have sprocket teeth attached to the rims for ultimate climbing power.
When will ridiculousness end?
Why did you subtract 100% from each of them? Gear range for XT 11-42 is 381, XX1 is 420%, and OneUp'd XT 11-50 is 454%.
I am very glad this exists though. Will be nice for a lot of folks in a lot of places. I don't see it as a cure for a lower climbing gear, as people seem to be focusing on. I see it as a cure for those that need to maintain their climbing gear, while moving up to a larger chainring in order to gain a higher top end. Places where you might be riding for a long ways on pavement or fire roads to access singletrack. I don't need it for where/how I ride right now, but I have lived and ridden in places where this would have been very useful.
I like to spin a decent cadence, but still have a big enough ring, (32/34) to rip it on a couple trails.
Wait till SRAM drops its new drivetrain next year!
Problem solved you whingers and whiners.
- Will this work with a "regular" Sram 11sp rear derailleur?
- If yes, will the shifting be sketchy, like when you put a 42t cog on a 10sp setup?
Compatibility shimano 11v and sram 12v, correct and precise operation.
but i can see this setup workin for some riders.
What are these things made for?
Christ. You do a lot of complaining. And look, none of it has changed anything.