[Closed] 1x11?

wonder if it does 10-36, or even 11-38?

The chainring looks funny. Is it really hooked teeth, instead of a guide?

[img] [/img]

WANT

Is what you have not shiney enough!!

wonder if it does 10-36, or even 11-38?

There is some analysis over on Pinkbike and they reckon it will be 10-42 !

thats just plain daft

Is it SRAM? More details?

*sigh*

Suntour did a 38T freewheel in the 70s.
Been there before.
Needed special (expensive and heavy) rear mech.

PaulD

also want. I've got 9 speed, and no intention of moving to 10. but if I could get 10-36 spread or more I would think of moving to 1 chainring for sure

[url= http://www.pinkbike.com/news/sram-xx1-drivetrain-2013-first-look.html ]More (speculative) details[/url].

Chainring looks packed out for the teeth that go between the outer plates of the chain.

Seems reasonable for a single ring up front. No idea how much difference it makes. Solution looking for a problem?

this madness has to stop.

There is some analysis over on Pinkbike and they reckon it will be 10-42 !

Actualy they make it make sense, it's only the same %age jump as in a 'normal' 11-36 cassette, and it's size means it fits on a normal freehub but overlaps the spokes.

And it would be alumninium so won't weigh too much either.

I've got 12-36 at the moment with a 32t front ring which is OK, not sure I'd need/want a lower gear that low unless I was really trying to conserve energy on a properly epic multi day ride. In which case I'd probbaly be OK with a double, but for something upto about 4 hours riding time 32-36 seems low enough.

And if it uses 10s chains and sprockets then the upgrade path is straightforeward, just make all the shifters 11s with a redundant click at the end, then you just buy and fit the mech and cassette.

guy in my LBS and I were chatting about 11 speed campag, and he reckons shimano hold the patents on 13 speed cassettes?

Seems like a good idea to me. If you can get the same spread of gears from 1x11 as ou do from 2x10 then why wouldn't you do it and ditch all the problems associated with front shifting.

So we're taking a 44T chainring off the front and sticking a 42T ring on the back?

Pinkbike stuff is interesting.

I like the look of this. I hate front mechs which is why I run 1*9 on my hardtail and HammerSchmit*9 on my big bike. I see too little benefit to going 10 speed on either bike but the XX1 could tempt me for the big bike.

he reckons shimano hold the patents on 13 speed cassettes?

It's 14 actualy!

Looks quite clever (google for it), I do wonder how strong a chain like that would be though, those U shaped links would surely bend a lot during shifitng, odly it seems to cover the cassette overhanging the spokes like the XX1?

I wonder if shimano will bring back 'Hone' as an enduro/race groupset if SRAM brings one out.

whatever happened to the Hope 9-36 cassette?

Can someone explain how PInkbike expect a 10t sprocket to fit on a standard freehub?

Cant see the pic properly, maybe they have replaced the lockring? Also, 40t sprocket? on an Alu freehub? good luck!

The photos on [url= http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/news/article/sram-xx1-prototype-spotted-this-one-goes-to-11-34098/ ]bikeradar[/url] are a lot clearer.

Also, 40t sprocket? on an Alu freehub? good luck!

It's rivited to the back of the 36t so not seperate, and the torque is the same whether you use a granny-36t or single ring and a 42t.

It looks to me like every part of it is unique:
Mech, Hub, Cassette (obviously), Chain and Chainring.

Im assuming shimano are working on this too, wonder what their take will be

also hopes cassette will have to be redesigned, meaning it may take even longer?

Why are poeple insisting on adding all this unsprung weight to the backs of their suspension bikes?

Either get fitter or put multiple/smaller chainrings up front.

Ah, interesting. They seem to have dropped the angled paralelogram on the mech, instead going for an offest upper jockey. Obviously if your staying with a single ring up front then you know how much chain slack the mech will need to take up for each shift and design the jockey wheel locations specifically. Not sure how that will work with single pivot frames tho.

Why are poeple insisting on adding all this unsprung weight to the backs of their suspension bikes?

Either get fitter or put multiple/smaller chainrings up front.

Seeing as it's aimed at racers, I doubt 'get fitter' is something they've not already exhaustively covered. And an additional 80g (the weight of a 42t outer ring on weight weenies) isn't going to cause problems compared to the other ~90000g of sprung mass. Especialy if it gives them more rest on the climbs.

Obviously if your staying with a single ring up front then you know how much chain slack the mech will need to take up for each shift and design the jockey wheel locations specifically. Not sure how that will work with single pivot frames tho.

Awesome. Having digested the Pinkbike and Bikeradar stuff I went and did my gearing calcs... and with a 28 front ring this system would give as low gearing as I currently have with the HammerSchmidt, and only lose a couple of big gears... which I can live with. Or stick with a 32 and lose my current granny which I rarely use.

I'd better start saving my pennies as I suspect this is going to cost two times what I think it will, plus new wheels.

Edit. I'll almost certainly change my mind when i actually see the costs involved 👿 👿 😈

It's 14 actualy!

Looks quite clever

Imagine if the you could then enclose it all in an oil bath within the hub allowing you to run a normal chain that would last for years. 🙂

The Campag 11speed chains are reckoned to be stronger than the 10spd ones, but looking at how narrow the Campag 11s is on my road bike (they almost look like jewellery chains) I can't see 11spd coping with mud very well. Also 2x11sp seems less tolerant to crossing over (big/big or small/small) than 10spd. I don't know the implications of this on 1x11?

Oh God.

I'm going to design a 20 speed cassette and have done with it.

And what problems do people have with front mechs? Mine change as sweetly as the rear mech, so I don't have any reason to change for a system which is heavier, more expensive and doubtless harder to index properly and reliably.

Remember folks, no matter how much bling and "technology" you have, you still have to pedal it!

How will it be heavier boriselbrus?
You're losing a shifter, cable and mech and chainring.
Gaining a large cassette cog.
It has the potential to be mechanically much simpler.

I like. What I really like is the fact that they're not afraid to change every part of the drivetrain.

Personally, I would rather just have higher ratio spacings than more rings. I would love a 1x10 with say 11-42. I'm sure there is a good reason this wouldn't work.

Personally, I would rather just have higher ratio spacings than more rings. I would love a 1x10 with say 11-42. I'm sure there is a good reason this wouldn't work.

You could probably get it wo work, but some of the jumps might be rather large and not very smooth, from a roadie perspective the jumps would do my head in, constantly looking for a gear that doesn't exist, either spinning uncomfortably fast or grinding more than i want.

I would love a 1x10 with say 11-42. I'm sure there is a good reason this wouldn't work.

Conventional rear mechs won't handle much more than 36 teeth I believe.

what problems do people have with front mechs? Mine change as sweetly as the rear mech

*Sigh*

Change fine when not under pressure, when not being bounced off by the terrain, and when not covered in copious amounts of mud and/or snow.

I like to challenge myself by riding stuff that is tricky, I like not having to worry if my chain is still on when stamping down a pedal stroke through the fun stuff, YMMV etc.

boriselbrus - Member

And what problems do people have with front mechs?

Why have two mechs when one will do? Simpler the better.

I don't have any reason to change for a system which is heavier, more expensive and doubtless harder to index properly and reliably.

As said previously there's no way it'll be heavier, even looking like for like. I'll wager that XX1 cassette will weigh less than a 10 speed SLX.

More expensive? Yes, probably, although one less shifter, mech and chainring. 'Plain' rings are dirt cheap too compared to ramped multi-rings, dunno about this 'special' one though.

Harder to index? It's one mech, with one button for 'up' and one for 'down', the fact there are 11 will make it no harder to do, by not needing to do a front mech as well it will be far simpler. Fewer moving parts/pivots/rings getting worn. Makes sense.

I like it! Reckon 10-36 would do me, with a 34t, or 11-40 with a 36t but I guess they'll offer options.

Considering how expensive XX/XG999 cassettes are I think it'll be priced in the 'hilarious' category.

Reckon 10-36 would do me, with a 34t, or 11-40 with a 36t but I guess they'll offer options.

According the the Bikerader article they will only be doing 10-42, no other options as the new mech is designed for those specific sizes.

... with chainrings in sizes 28/30/32/34/36/38

OK, the "11" bit will be heavier than "10", obviously if you already use 1x10 then adding an extra sprocket to the cassette will make it heavier, just as 1x10 is heavier than 1x9.

And I have NEVER dropped the chain on a MTB (apart from when I ran 1x9 without a chain guide) despite running a triple with no chain guide, despite regular trips to the Lakes/Peaks, Scottish Highlands etc. They have quite a few rocks there which I'm quite fond of riding over. Maybe I've been very lucky or maybe the force is strong with me, or maybe putting the chain on the 44t ring before I start descending helps. I honestly don't know, but I don't exactly crawl down at walking pace...

TBH I can understand single chain ring setups, but I still don't get 2x10 as in most cases you lose a 22t granny ring* for a 36t rear sprocket, which makes it heavier and puts the weight on the unsprung rear axle, then you have to make more recovery shifts when you change chainrings as the gap between them is bigger than on a triple.

Anyway, if you're happy with your gear setup and enjoy your riding then whatever you run is good isn't it. 😀

*Yes I know you change the size of the other rings as well.

Even accounting for an extra sprocket that's far wider gaps than the 10 speed 11-36. Hmmm....

So those for whom 1x10 is great, but who would choose a [i]slightly [/i]wider range are shafted? Bugger.

Edit: From the BR article:

So you hit a bump today and you’ve got your chain mass and your derailleur mass. It can actually activate the parallelogram and cause ghost shifting. If you add a clutch to that and you’ve really significantly stopped that force, you’ve actually added to the potential for ghost shifting.

Read: our 10 speed mechs are crap, you need this instead 🙄

Read: our 10 speed mechs are crap, you need this instead

I thought that, but it's not something I've noticed in practice, probably because in situations where the chains clattering enough to cause a ghost shift then I'm not pedaling?

Also, with a big 42t cassette ring the parralelogram would be much more vertical, which would make the problem much much worse as the chains oscilating in the direction the mech moves to shift? I can see the appeal for XC though for that kind of mech ona normal sized cassette, where you might be pedaling hard over a rocky climb, but for enduro (which this seems to be aimed at) there tends to be less fast technical climbing and more need for a 'normal' sized cassette + a bail out gear for the linking stages.

Thinking more about this... what I do like about the HammerSchmidt is that you can dump/grab a load of gears quickly. That will not be so easy when you have to shift across a load of sprockets to achieve the same result... and turn the cranks at the same time.