Forum menu
SRAM X7 2x10 Low Direct Mount Front Mech at 137g - £28
SRAM X0 2x10 Low Direct Mount Front Mech at 130g - £56
Double the price for 7g less weight and a different number written on the cage. Pffft...
This gets even worse when you start comparing Shimano XTR, XT, LX/Hone/SLX and Alivio mechs.
Price and weight are completely random.
PaulD
go 1 x 9/10/11
Does anyone actually notice their front mech from one year to the next? Seriously?
I don't believe that there's any discernible difference from Deore through to XTR, apart from some miniscule weight difference that could probably be accounted for by clipping your toe-nails before going out for a ride 😀
Is weight the only measure for comparison? Or are robustness, precision or longevity not factors. I'm sure plenty of people value prettiness over grams
They're almost exactly the same!
[img] 
[/img]
X0
[img] 
[/img]
X7
Ive hated every front mech I've ever owned. I can't wait for a better solution but still retain gear range.
My bike still has an Shimano STX-RC front Mech on it from [s]1998[/s] the stone age which has been carried over from old bikes.
Works fine, weighs about 10g more than a new one.
[quote=hugor]Ive hated every front mech I've ever owned. I can't wait for a better solution but still retain gear range.
Hammerschmidt?
I've got an original Shimano Exage on the front my old Saracen which still works fine.
mmmm, since when did weight correlate with quality?
Same for 25+ years mtbing
fwiw my xtr mech definitely works better in both function and looks to my deore one.
4x betterer?
Hugor - there is a cranks system the was basically a chainring split into 4 quarters which expanded to move the chain. Think it was on here a while back, or maybe twitter but quite a clever solution
I was cleaning my old Kona the other night and wondering why front mechs have got so portly and comparitively ugly. Look at a 1993 XT mech and it really is an exercise in pleasing simplicity compared to the modern stuff.
Front mechs (unlike rears) get battered about and lose efficiency gradually, ime. So you think it's fine and can't figure out why it's not shifting well, but it's actually distorted and a new one will be spot on.
I wonder if a better built one would last longer in this respect? No idea.
Especially don't bother with expensive SRAM front mechs!
With Shimano, my experience is that higher spec ones are a bit more durable as well as lighter... But then, my SLX doubles are lighter than XTR triples, IIRC.
I could be completely wrong, but isn't the quality of the shifter more important than the quality of the front mech? ...in terms of shifting quality
Taff - Browning
[img] 
[/img]
iv had a sram x5 on for 2 years now on my hardail paid £5 for it and it works happy days
lighter = better
cheaper = better
whateverIwant = better
It's all subjective.
Ive hated every front mech I've ever owned. I can't wait for a better solution but still retain gear range.
XX1, better solution than hammerschmidt I reckon.
The old M952 XTR mechs were great, they had a parallelogram action and shifted really nicely. Noticed very little difference on newer ones though, and for a while Deore was the lightest!
Gunz - MemberI was cleaning my old Kona the other night and wondering why front mechs have got so portly and comparitively ugly. Look at a 1993 XT mech and it really is an exercise in pleasing simplicity compared to the modern stuff.
When I discovered that the SRAM front mech off my old bike wouldn't fit onto my new 456 Evo, I resorted to bunging an 18 year old STX-RC mech on.
Works great, is smaller and neater than modern mechs and works with a SRAM shifter too.
Rorschach - Member4x betterer?
good point.
No maybe x2 but then (and this may just be sheer coincidence) my deore one failed recently and the XTR is going strong, both are on hardtails and have had similar conditions.
the most unscientific comparison ever for which I apologise.
Why would you want a front mech?
Just why?
Get fitter.
This argument takes us to a singlespeed which is not sane!
Get fitter.
No! You get fatter! 😛
The old M952 XTR mechs were great, they had a parallelogram action and shifted really nicely. Noticed very little difference on newer ones though, and for a while Deore was the lightest!
Just to get back to the original point, AFAIK the M952 was the lightest MTB front mech Shimano ever made - the M960 was certainly significantly heavier. Sadly that was from the age when XTR was still non-compact, hence the lovely NOS E-type M952 I have doesn't work with my chainset - I guess at some point I'll give up on the idea of getting it to work and put it back on ebay before butchering it.
Yep, the E-type one had the carbon back plate too, was lovely! I think it was when M960 was current that Deore was the lightest. Daft!
Saying that... having multi-pull etc has made things easier!
My XTR mech has been on my bike for the best part of ten years. I definitely remember swapping out cheaper mechs because they developed play
A lot depends on the mech design with shimano.
Top clamp / bottom swing seem to last a LOT longer than the bottom clamp / top swing which seem to go rattly a lot quicker.
From my own experience the cheaper bottom clamp ones do go rattly a lot quicker than XTs. I've got a 10 yo XT top clamp that is still going strong with no play in it.
This argument takes us to a singlespeed which is not sane!
Or actually practical for much of your riding.
But if you can race XC on a 1x drivetrain, race enduro on a 1x drivetrain, and race dh on a 1x drivetrain, and it is comfortable enough for general day-to-day stuff, I can't see why anyone needs a front mech.
I've actually come to the decision to go 1x10 and just change chainrings depending on what I'm riding. Screw a front mech, get a Sraitline Silent Guide 🙂
PSA- Don't bother with expensive front mechs
This sounds like a Viz guide. As in "when your pet pig gets injured, just put bacon over the wound"
"don't bother with expensive front mechs, just shift the chain with your fingers!"
Can't see why anyone needs any more than 8/9/10 gears anyhow...
[i]But if you can race XC on a 1x drivetrain, race enduro on a 1x drivetrain, and race dh on a 1x drivetrain, and it is comfortable enough for general day-to-day stuff, I can't see why anyone needs a front mech.[/i]
To reduce the amount of time you walk?
Can't see why anyone needs any more than 8/9/10 gears anyhow...
You don't necessarily, but the spread is handy. Are you new to this biking stuff? 🙂
But if you can race XC on a 1x drivetrain, race enduro on a 1x drivetrain,
Er, you can do those things, and pros probably do. But they are pros, most of us are not. What a silly comment!
+1 for old mechs being far better
On the other hand I was quite disappointed with my new SLX rear. Fitted an XT to the Pitch but got a SLX for the hardtail, lots of pressed steel where the XT was machined aluminum. The XT just didn't look cheep.
Will it be £10 better/worse? No idea, I rarely get long enough out of them to notice these days!
I've not read this etc etc, but.
The front mech does a huge amount of work, often shifting from 22 to 44 in one go. No easy life here like the rear mech. It's amazing how many folk overlook the importance of this piece of kit.
The dearer kit IME has been far superior on and off road.
They're almost exactly the same!
Except the mechanical bit, which isn't the same at all.
Also agree with top clamps being better. Plus with a top clamp you get less debris build up in the B/B area
I have thought about using a single chainring. I already reduced to a double after deciding that £40 was a lot to spend on a ring I rarely used and spent most of its time acting as a circular saw for logs.
Now I run 22/36 with a 11-32 cassette. Not sure I could bin another one though, at least not without ruining my knees/walking, or spinning out.