Got to agree with obelix. All my roady mates sneered and mocked Di2 but one by one they are all buying it, usually with the excuse that it came with a new bike! You can always find plenty of people to buy stuff because it is new, shiny and is marketed cleverly. I can’t believe Shimano haven’t noticed the money SRAM are making on xxi.

Im amased no one has made a walk around hope hub free hub with the bottom two sprockets machine into the free hub and fit the cassette from the rear. Modify a shimano ally carrier and you’ve got a 36-10 cassette where the sprokets that wear the most taken from a standard £30 item.

Im amased no one has made a walk around hope hub free hub with the bottom two sprockets machine into the free hub and fit the cassette from the rear. Modify a shimano ally carrier and you’ve got a 36-10 cassette where the sprockets that wear the most taken from a standard £30 item.

Hope already did a 9-36, 9 and 10-speed, (machined) cassettes for the Pro 2, but never got it to market.

There are also tales of people cannibalizing Capreo cassettes (and of course FH bodies) to make 9-32 or 9-34, 9-speed cassettes for MTBs or touring, not sure what Hub bodies they use for this though…

If your ever feeling Flush enough to own an S-works Demo 8, Specialized use a bastardized Capreo cassette, custom DT Free Hub body and limit set 9-speed X0 parts to operate a 7-speed 9-20 cassette, Christ knows why of course, other than to make it cost the earth, wear out faster and spare parts harder to obtain…

The point I’m not really managing to make is that 9 tooth sprockets, which could massively increase the range of a cassette without the need to fit a diner plate at the top, have been in production and use for a while. Shimano have adopted them only in one rather “Niche” group for folders, and Hope had what seemed like a very good pop it ~3 years ago but for some reason (cost?) never put into production (at least not Yet?).

A a 1×10 or 1×11 9-36 Cassette with a 28t chainring would actually give a pretty broad spread of gears, almost comparable with 10-42 without the need for quite such a diner plate, shimano could actually do that, but I don’t reckon they will, they are basically too stubborn and TBH too fixated on Di2.

But then it’s worth remembering this is still a pretty small corner of the market, there are still plenty who would find even the discounted prices for X01 obscene, most of the actual revenue for Shimano and SRAM’s MTB parts will still come from 2/3xN kit in the SLX/X7 and below ranges sold for OEM use, in that respect “Dynasys” is still pretty competitive and durable in the land of sub 1K complete bikes…

Current Top end trickle down to these levels will take at least a couple of years post XTR/X0 launch, meaning SRAM are probably ahead at present…

I look fwd to watching the new XTR curve-ball strike : )

Current Top end trickle down to these levels will take at least a couple of years post XTR/X0 launch, meaning SRAM are probably ahead at present…

except that SRAM is made of cheese and has crap reliability from a manufacturers point of view.

Oh and the spares are obscenely over priced.

A a 1×10 or 1×11 9-36 Cassette with a 28t chainring would actually give a pretty broad spread of gears,

it would, but my experience with cogs smaller than ~15T in the filth over longer distances means I have no interest in using 9-10T cogs. 12Ts get jammed up pretty quick as it is. I’m happy enough on a limited range of gears though, or with FDs.

My Tuppence:

Shimano wont introduce a 10 or 11 speed 10-42 (or even 11-40) cassette as the gaps aren’t just ‘too big’ they’re too vertical, which is why a XX1 mech isn’t just a slightly wider XX mech, just sticking a really wide range on it would ghost shift like crazy. SRAM realised that and made the XX1 mech and patented all the good bits.

So shimano has 3 options:
a) Make something crap, or significantly not as good as XX1, using existing mechs and a 11-40 cassette.
b) Pay SRAM to licence the XX1 mech design
c) Use Di2 to do the same task.
(or D, do nothing).

All apart from C are probably very unlikely!

I’ve been using Di2 on the road since it came out. Its nothing short of fantastic its flawless after first set up, it compensates massively for poor shifting especially when you are tired or absolutely on the limit, auto trims the front mech which if on a 2×11 MTB would be a massive help. I jumped straight on XX1 when it came out and rate it, have had zero issues besides 1 broken chain. Thats running it from Feb in grinding paste winter conditions right through to August (and i didnt need a replacement cassette) but i would bin it tomorrow for Shimano if they did 1×11 or Di2.

except that SRAM is made of cheese and has crap reliability from a manufacturers point of view.

Oh and the spares are obscenely over priced

Ive been a big fan of Sram for a while (since they introduced their trigger shifters) but the current 10 speed stuff doesn’t seem to last all that well. I’ve gone through two X9 shifters in two years which is pretty poor but my old 9 speed stuff is still going strong on my BFe.

Back on topic, it will be interesting to see what Shimano do. I think it will be electronic to be different to Sram and to avoid their patents. They can also be pretty stubborn resisting what the market wants and doing what they want – reverse rear mechs and those silly flappy brake levers being two examples.

They can also be pretty stubborn resisting what the market wants and doing what they want – reverse rear mechs and those silly flappy brake levers being two examples.

True, but no one knew they wanted

*pedals
*chain drive
*a non 1:1 gear ratio
*freewheels
*multiple gears
*indexed gears
*shifting gates/ramps
*di2
*wide bars
*suspension
*disk brakes
*11 speed wide range cassets
*narrow/wide chainrings
*29ers

Untill someone made it, proved it was better, and even then it often took decades of convincing before it became popular. IMO rapid rise was a brilliant thing and the only thing that kept me from going SRAM. It’s downfall was shifting had to be re-learnt, and most people had 2+ bikes, therefore wouldn’t upgrade one for a minor benifit. If they still made it I’d still be buying it. Never got to try flappy paddles, but I like them on the road bike so can’t see why not, I think cost and being tied to one brake/shifter put people off more than it’s useability.

except that SRAM is made of cheese and has crap reliability from a manufacturers point of view.

Oh and the spares are obscenely over priced.

Agreed, and agreed, but first to market actually counts for a lot, perhaps more than having a more durable, robust product in some people’s eyes.
I can see an X7 level 1X11 being a decider (maybe only using an 11-42t cassette to give broader compatibility?) the key USPs still being thick/thin rings and a broad range cassette those would be quite attractive to OEM purveyors of dandy horses, Don’t you think? And that’s where SRAM really could start causing Shimano headaches in the next couple of years IMO…

Of course I can’t see Shimano finding an answer to the thick/thin chainrings any time soon, and shimano just don’t do straight copying of ideas or licencing from others, especially a major competitor… TBH they need to start

SRAM have actually managed a proper blinder with XX1/X01, something which they’ve been looking for for a while with stuff like Hammershmidt, etc. The trickle down will need to be rapid, having something similar available at an “X7” level by YM 2015/16, a “Proper” 1×11 “groupset” to suit the aspirational ~£900-1500 market, Shimano will be trying to persuade the same lot that leccy shifting is a similarly tempting option (although I reckon they will be at least 18 months behind “X7+1” in getting that to market), I really don’t know which will be more of a customer draw in the longer term, my gut says big range 1×11+ so SRAM could well edge the race…

In the not too distant future I can foresee a time when big range 1xN drives shifted mechanically or electronically are a reasonable, affordable and durable option, a leccy shifted MTB will eventually become a viable “lower maintenance” possibility as charging a battery is quicker and easier than changing stretched cables, and either way chains and sprockets still need about the same level of care… Of course by then there will be a new R&D/Marketing race on to offer us a sub 350g CVT Gearbox or Hub, that costs the same as a kidney on the black market and you absolutely MUST HAVE or you will Die!… Possibly 😉

TBH I’m still well behind the times, using 2×9 SLX and I have no really need to change at present, but I find these things interesting, I like taking a bit of a “Holistic” view of it all…

Technically there’s no real blockers to Shimano putting together an XX1 challenger tomorrow in say a 9-38t specific hub/cassette/chain/mech 1×10 (maybe 1×11) package, they could achieve this with their own extant technologies, and from a marketing POV it would make sense to target such a product at “Trail riders” as a variant of the “Saint and “Zee” groups, will they do it? Probably not, just because a few of their users are “Hacking” their products to try and achieve this sort of thing doesn’t mean they’ll take the bloody hint though!…

The question for me is why?
With a 10 speed 36t cassette I’ve never felt the need for more, maybe Shimano feel the same?

I read that sort of comment a lot on the internet. Do you: live somewhere without mountains, ride only trail centers, are you insanely fit or are you just lying to yourself? I have recently tried a 10 X 36t setup just out of curiosity for winter. I find it easier than I thought and love the simplicity but trying to ride that all day in proper mountains or even big hills would be grueling and make certain technical climbs impossible (for me). This is where the 1X11/42t comes in but I wouldn’t pay that kind of money on an item that could be done in a hard Scottish year. So I am going to try one of these 42t cassette cogs from Oneup as a cheap alternative until Shimano bring out an SLX version that’s affordable.

No offence by the way as if you really can ride 1×10 36t all day in the Lakes or Scotland etc then you are an athlete!

Duir – I think that to a certain extent you just get used to it. I run an 11-36 cassette with a 32 tooth ring and am OK on most things. My riding varies from places like Cannock and Llandegla to Long Mynd to days out in the Dales.

There are times when I am spent and struggle but if its that steep that I’d need a granny ring and a 34 tooth ring on the cassette, I’d probably be faster pushing!

It is definitely going to be interesting to see how Shimano react to Sram who have stolen a bit of a march on them with the mega wide range 11 speed cassettes. The 1×10 thing works for me and I like the simplicity of it but I can see why a lot of people still like a double ring up front.

I read that sort of comment a lot on the internet. Do you: live somewhere without mountains, ride only trail centers, are you insanely fit or are you just lying to yourself? I have recently tried a 10 X 36t setup just out of curiosity for winter. I find it easier than I thought and love the simplicity but trying to ride that all day in proper mountains or even big hills would be grueling and make certain technical climbs impossible (for me).

And you see that as a ‘counter arguement’ all the time too – the classic of i’m not fit enough to ride 1×10 so clearly everyone who does, rides on the flats of the Norfolk Broads & can’t possibly ride up any hills.

It’ not for everyone, and yes there are people who kid themselves into thinking they can cope, but there are also plenty of people who arn’t supremely fit who cope just fine.

I ran it for a few years, and never really felt the need for more. Not too long ago I got a new bike with X01, which I now run with a 34T front rather than a 32T. I’ve barely used the big 42T on the back, and i’d hardly consider myself as ‘insanely fit’.

No offence by the way as if you really can ride 1×10 36t all day in the Lakes or Scotland etc then you are an athlete!

I’ve done 40+ mile rides in the Lakes on 1×10 (11-36t cassette and 32t chainring) on a big bobby (it had a blown shock by the end of the ride, so it was a ‘propper’ ride!) full susser. With the exception of the climb up the waterfall on the far side of Skidaw House it was fine. And I’m definately no ‘athlete’! XX1 with a 30t chainring would have made it less painfull climbing up the valley to Skidaw House from Keswick though, I’m not sure anything short of a motorbike would make the waterfall side enjoyable.

XX1 is too different/patented for Shimano to come up with a competitor without using Di2, and is SRAM release an X9.1 and X7.1 it’ll struggle on cost (XX1 mechs are Di2 prices though). I think they should throw their weight behind a propper gearbox a-la Pinion, I don’t see how they can be compettive just playing catchup now that SRAM have moved from just copying Shimano (remember the court cases over triger shifters) to inovating something new.

On the other hand, if someone could sell me reliable shifting that wasn’t dependant on the cleanliness of my gear cables, I’d be interested.

[quote]It’s a solution to a problem that didn’t exist.[/quote]When everything else on your (modern) bike is using the latest technology relying on a cable and a return spring for your shifting is a bit rubbish. I’m very interested in leccy shifting just not at XTR and certainly not at introductory XTR full rrp prices.

reverse rear mechs and those silly flappy brake levers being two examples.

quite a few people think RR was a brilliant idea, the only reason it was dropped is because the general public are idiots 🙂 Flappy brake levers are de rigueur on road bikes so not a completely mental idea, just didn’t translate well to mtbs ergonomically.

a 10 speed 32×11-36 still seems too narrow a gear range to me aswell TBH not sure a 1×11 would be low enough, but not quite sure why I’m perfectly happy to SS a lot of the time but want silly low ratios when I bother to hulk around a geared setup.

I’ve made a hobby of waiting for people who’ve declared 1×10 “perfect for their riding” to get off and push at times when everyone else is riding. It’s never taken very long tbh. Usually it just means “I’ve not yet ridden the climb that will break me”.

(I really like my 1×10 but I was never daft enough to declare it perfect so it hasn’t come as a shock on those occasions when it’s miserable)

for the past 2 years ive been 1×10 on a 32t front 11-36 outback in the peak district, im a fairly fit rider (top 5 to 10 on most of the main white peak climbs off road), and the climbs i couldnt get up on 1×10 with above setup neither could any of the people i rode with on 3x or 2x setups, basically the gearing didnt make a difference, it would take a fitter rider in general not the gears

some stuff is just steep around the peak combined with rocks for climbing and its hit and miss whether you can get up it or not due to the terrain not the gearing (for me personally), ive only ever struggled on a few occasions to just not grind up, but even then i truly dont think anyone i know would ride up the same thing in even 3×9, as it really doesnt make that much difference to me (personally)

ive since gone x01 and its a revelation TBH, some people think its just banging on a extra gear but for me its far more than just that, the range lower down gives me a steady more constant pace than on 1×10 and yes the 42t is nice to have on some climbs, but i’ll still struggle on a few very very very challenging peak climbs near me even with the 42, and as somebody else stated above its then sometimes just quicker to get off and push, some stuff will beat you regardless of gearing (this is not an excuse its just the way it is sometimes in the peak/lakes/scotland etc)

the beauty of x01 one really to me is when you do use the 42t on the back combined with a 32 up front you are still keeping a nice steady cadence, on a 3x setup in granny ring (24teeth up front), you just end up spinning like crazy and not going anywhere, with 32t front x01 42t out back i still in my mind keep the pace the same as i was on 1×10 but its easier on my legs, its noticeable too after doing 20+ miles in the peak you legs dont feel quite as drained and any further slog climbs you have to come generally arent as harsh on your muscles…but again all the routes im doing now ive gladly done with 1×10 and had no issues climbing, you just get stronger and used to it, its only once you use xx1 you really see the benefits of it

i could definitely see why XC racers will all be clad with it soon over 1×10

i genuinly think its amazing TBH, and shimano have left it a bit late to come back and bite shimano, as much as id love see a Di2 shimano groupset, i cant honestly see that filtering down to SLX level (price wise) for a hell of a long time, if at all…..whereas sram doesnt need any electronics and has it all in place to filter it down, ive never been a sram fan, but if you get chance to use XX1/X01 you have to give it a go, its by far the cleanest, shifting experience ive ever used (ive used xtr, xt, slx etc), the extra cog out back is genius and shifts just as well as any other gear out back, its silent, seems pretty hard wearing the 10t at the bottom of the cassette gives you a bit more speed on the fireroads/roads etc if needed

SRAM have absolutly trumped shimano here and i cant see how shimano can realistically better them

In relation to the DI2, where do you put the battery on an MTB?

You cant be certain a bike will have bottle cage mounts and most likely purchasers are probably running a dropper post so that location is out as well.

I cant see them just strapping it to the frame, so where will it go?

Finkill, I think manufacturers will get suitably creative. For example, Cervelo do this on the P5;

No reason why a mountain bike frame couldn’t have a similar “pocket” built in somewhere.

I cant see them just strapping it to the frame, so where will it go?

Why not? Di2 won’t be the first MTB technology to require batteries attaching to the frame. Lights? e-i shocks? In “a few” years we may have one battery powering multiple technologies.

Maybe Shimano will surprise us with a lightweight robust internal geared hub… that would be nice!

Strapping it to the frame isn’t very neat and certainly doesn’t seem like a solution to the issue.

I’m sure there will be lots of creative solutions for new bikes, but what about the aftermarket adopters? Perhaps they are expecting everyone to buy another new bike.

Hands up who actually can be arsed with electronic shifting? Okay, I’m sure Shimano will make something for both of you. Not sure they’re about to deliver a cross country single ring set up though, which is what the rest of us want them to do.

Me? Sram chainring paired with Zee/SLX shifting and 11-36 cassette… job done.

Hands up who actually can be arsed with electronic shifting? Okay, I’m sure Shimano will make something for both of you. Not sure they’re about to deliver a cross country single speed set up though, which is what the rest of us want them to do.

I’d wager that there are far more people who want Shimano to make Di2 off road than make a singlespeed set up.

I’d buy it. And I’m sure that I’m going to be joined by more than one other person who’d want it.

As ever, at this point, I need to ask the obvious question – Have you tried Di2 on road? I have, on many a demo bike. It was superb, and if I rode road more, I’d buy a Di2 road bike.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

If Di2 means no more trim, front mech adjustments and gear cable changes then I’ll start saving my money now!

curiousyellow – Member
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again.

If Di2 means no more trim, front mech adjustments and gear cable changes then I’ll start saving my money now!

XX1 pretty much renders trim and front mech unnecessary – and the benefits of Di2 without a front mech for MTB are small as a result – the complications involved with batteries start to minimise the benefit further, then the prospect of having to strengthen the mech to cope with mud and damage means it’s unlikely to be lighter than XX1, and it certainly won’t be cheaper.

I think it’s unlikely they’ll produce a low-end wide range 1x setup, at least not first, and I don’t think 2×11 XTR, electronic or not, is going to be a game changer or a huge success, when XX1 is the alternative.

the complications involved with batteries start to minimise the benefit further, then the prospect of having to strengthen the mech to cope with mud and damage means it’s unlikely to be lighter than XX1, and it certainly won’t be cheaper.

I don’t think a battery is all that “complicated” for most users is it? I mean my life is full of battery powered electronics that don’t defeat my modern-ape brain on a daily basis, charge ’em or change ’em I think we can deal with it honest…

As for increased Mech weights? isn’t the Ultegra Di2 rear mech lighter than the Mechanical one? (that’s the mini factoid that gets chucked about normally isn’t it?).

TBH I think people are looking for faults with the MTB version of Di2 before they’ve had a change to emerge, the biggest current issue with Roadie Di2 seems to be user setup and firmware issues, from what I’ve skimmed on the interwebs… All of which is pretty fixable.

I reckon a pair of bar end caps housing some cells would be a sexy way to hide the battery, but I’d not be too worried over a little box strapped to the frame or mounted on a bottle boss, most of the MTBs I see are pretty cluttered with stuff already (my own included) I don’t think Di2 will exactly spoil the “Aesthetic”…

In all this technology debate I am surprised nobody has brought up the old chestnut about what a primitive engineering solution the whole derailleur system is. There is an irony in having hi tech servos shoving chains across sprockets!
Having said that until somebody produces a genuinely viable gearbox I shall be sticking with the primitive. ( not Rohloff, maybe it is good but the price is still way too much for my SLX calibrated buying systems)

cookeaa – Member

TBH I think people are looking for faults with the MTB version of Di2 before they’ve had a change to emerge,

Not looking for faults, so much as trying to see where the advantages would be, relative to the likely cost, and not really seeing them (in the context of 1x – the front mech thing is a big benefit)

the old chestnut about what a primitive engineering solution the whole derailleur system is.

Primitive maybe, but also very adaptable and efficient. It’s a basic idea that’s been very well refined.

Hands up who actually can be arsed with electronic shifting?

Not in the slightest bit, personally. Added complexity is just what I don’t want. DI2 is amazing kit though, whether you want to own it or not.

Electronic shifting sounds great, and when they can make an electronic mech that doesn’t cost more than my XT, I’ll probably be interested.

When everything else on your (modern) bike is using the latest technology relying on a cable and a return spring for your shifting is a bit rubbish. I’m very interested in leccy shifting just not at XTR and certainly not at introductory XTR full rrp prices.

And with all the materials we have today yet we’re still building wheels with bits of steel wire…

Bikes are a compromise between technology and durability. What happens to that little electric wire when you bin it and your bars get ripped around 360 degrees? What if a servo fails in the middle of a ride? If a mechanical system has issues at least you can work with it. If things go wrong with an electric system you probably wouldn’t be able to find anywhere in the forest to plug in your soldering iron.

I’d be fine with shifting going hydraulic but I haven’t got a problem with cables. Actually I can’t remember the last time I had a shifting issue? Maybe people who do aren’t mechanically minded?

XX1 pretty much renders trim and front mech unnecessary – and the benefits of Di2 without a front mech for MTB are small as a result – the complications involved with batteries start to minimise the benefit further, then the prospect of having to strengthen the mech to cope with mud and damage means it’s unlikely to be lighter than XX1, and it certainly won’t be cheaper.

I think it’s unlikely they’ll produce a low-end wide range 1x setup, at least not first, and I don’t think 2×11 XTR, electronic or not, is going to be a game changer or a huge success, when XX1 is the alternative.

Completely agree.

1x elec shifting is likely to be heavier, more complicated and certainly more expensive. No benefits to offset any of this over XX1 or similar.

2x elec shifting does make more sense with the front mech benefits but I’m not sure how popular multiple chainrings are any more for MTB and if many people really require any more range than XX1.

Don’t get me wrong, if I were to build a reasonable level road bike I strongly consider Ultegra Di2 and probably love it. I just don’t see what Shimano can come up with to pry people away from XX1. Let’s hope for a pleasant surprise!

What if a servo fails in the middle of a ride? If a mechanical system has issues at least you can work with it. If things go wrong with an electric system you probably wouldn’t be able to find anywhere in the forest to plug in your soldering iron.

So many riders are within an hour or so of a town or the carpark on most rides that this is less of an issue. Hydraulic discs are tough / impossible to fix mid-ride if they go wrong but they’re universally used and rarely fail, DI2 will be the same I expect. The get-outs would be the same as a bust mech now. I’d not use hydros or electrics on a remote-use distance bike but that seems like minority stuff in MTB.

And you see that as a ‘counter arguement’ all the time too – the classic of i’m not fit enough to ride 1×10 so clearly everyone who does, rides on the flats of the Norfolk Broads & can’t possibly ride up any hills.

Not what I mean at all. When the most insanely humbling riders I know, that can ride up seemingly impossible and ridiculously difficult climbs or massive mountain climbs without stopping can’t manage it on a 1X10 setup I have to wonder.

Sorry but if you can ride the stuff I am thinking of in Northern Scotland and the Lakes on a 1X10 and clean all the climbs then you are a very talented and fit rider.

Not what I mean at all. When the most insanely humbling riders I know, that can ride up seemingly impossible and ridiculously difficult climbs or massive mountain climbs without stopping can’t manage it on a 1X10 setup I have to wonder.
Sorry but if you can ride the stuff I am thinking of in Northern Scotland and the Lakes on a 1X10 and clean all the climbs then you are a very talented and fit rider.

So that’s exactly what you mean…? ‘If I/my friends can’t manage then no one can’.

I think people are confusing “not mechanical” with “complex” a servo, a controller, a battery and a couple of microswitches, as a package of components these can actually be made pretty robust, lightweight, and discrete, when you think about it, Shifters can all but disappear, I mean how chuffing complex is the collection of mechanisms in a Current 10 speed shifter pod Vs a couple of microswitches? cable routing and snagging presents about the same challenge it always did, not really an issue as such…

People bang on about cost but the cost of any technology comes down with adoption and volume… I mentioned the advent of 8-speed for MTBs before, there was a time when that was an expensive (probably seen as unnecessary by some) new feature, these days most would turn their nose up at it for being a bit “old”… Like everything else that comes out for bikes the first example to market will always be pricey, but it helps drive demand and within ~5 years it becomes affordable or it dies out… I doubt XX1/X01 has made SRAM much, if any, money yet, but you can bet the kids will all go batshitcrazy for the tremendous “Value” that any future “X91” and “X71” offer…

You can imagine and list down all the potential faults for either Mechanically or Electrically actuated MTB drivetrains (And I expect Shimano have probably done a few FMEA’s on both by now), I reckon they’d probably come out about even TBH, mechanically actuated mechs are very, very good at what they do, but like any mechanism they are susceptible to wear and tear and resultant failures, using electronics removes some of these and adds the potential for a few different new ones… So what?

There seem to be a lot of people pre-judging the reliability and maintainability of a product that they have not actually seen yet. If I’d described XX1 to you 5 years ago most would have scoffed and said it was utter cobblers:

-Too much of a stretch for any mech
-Needs a new rear hub.
-No chain device? chain will bounce off all the time.
-11 speed on an MTB will ghost shift like a bastard.
-11-36 is plenty

These days people seem to be in a bit of a froth about how awesome XX1 is and how utterly redundant any other drivetrain concept might be… If you judge the feasibility of future developments on what is commercially available today, you’ll almost always be wrong…

Di2 for MTBs has lots of potential…

The whole ‘electronic shifting is rubbish for mtbing’ thing is quite funny really.

For once, the road market has taken a step ahead of mtbs and all of these things have been discussed at length amongst roadies (and continue to be, almost exclusively by people who haven’t tried it) and like the jump from 7 speed to 8 then to 9 then 10 and 11, it’s been fine in the real world. It works, it doesn’t go wrong and all the ‘it’s too complicated, it won’t work in the wet, it’ll go flat mid-ride, etc’ scare stories have been just that.

In fact, much more than fine. I reckon that everyone I’ve spoken to who has actually ridden Di2 agrees that it’s better than mechanical shifting in terms of performance. Of course, the cost side of it is a very valid point for discussion but essentially that’s it – is the cost worth it?

There’s no reason it won’t hold up to mtbing with the same performance benefits. Cost, again, is the issue. For now.

I think people are confusing “not mechanical” with “complex” a servo, a controller, a battery and a couple of microswitches,

It does make me wonder why electronic shifting isn’t actually cheaper than mechanica (I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s cheaper to manufacture.) Assume they are just recouping the cost of R&D… and an opportunity to bump up the price with something new.