- Sram XX – is 2 x 10 the future?
mmm…. The ‘groupset’ idea doesn’t work quite as well for SRAM (in its current state) as for Shimano – SRAM as a brand is just one small part of the whole range, with most riders knowing the brakes better as Avid, the cranks as Truvativ, the forks as Rockshox etc. Does this mark a move towards a single unified brand structure for SRAM?
As for the 10 speed, what does it mean for wheel building? And what’s the spread of sprockets?Posted 8 years ago
Personally I’m unconvinced; you would think that the tolerances involved have to reach a logical limit when it comes to wet mud. Plus I reckon that the majority of those going for 2×10 will have come from 2×9 setups, as it’s less of a mental shift.
But I’m far from an expert, and interested to see how it flies!SannySubscriber
So how does a 26 x 32 cope with proper grinding climbs? I would REALLY have struggled to have gotten up Skiddaw on Saturday using that combination. My 20 x 32 meant that I was able to spin up the climb whereas a 26 would definitely have meant a push. If you are into racing, I can accept that it may make sense but for big mountain rides, it’s surely a non starter? It’s kind of like the Vauxhall Signum in that it answers a question that no one has asked. It seems daft to potentially limit your enjoyment of a ride by reducing the available spread of gear ratios. Even singlespeeding makes sense but 2 x 10 just doesn’t!!!!!!
While I’m ranting, just why is it that 20 tooth inners never caught on? They make sense especially in the world of the 29er and can make the vital difference between riding and walking on long steep climbs. Perhaps now is the time for a comeback? 😀
SannyPosted 8 years agomrmoMember
2×10 makes perfect sense, you can actual get your lowest gears on a climb under reasonable load, something that doesn’t happen when using 3 rings.
as for the gear not being low enough? how low do you want it to be? it isn’t that long ago that 24×28 was the normal bottom gear, and to be blunt, most people seemed to cope with it.
If the gears aren’t low enough MTFU and get fit and stop blaming the bike for your inability to ride up a climb.Posted 8 years agoollie TMember
Ive been using 2×9 28,42 with a 11×32 cassette on my race bike this year and i have to say its great. I havent needed a lower gear though the climb at the gorrick enduro was as steep enough any more and i would need a 11×34 to be comfortable so 2×10 will be a good thing.Posted 8 years agojonbMember
Nowt wrong with 2 x 9 or infact 2 x 8. I’d take 2 x 7 if it worked more reliably than current setups.
I think there is a trend moving away from weight reduction and fancy technology to simplicity and durability. Look how poular rigid singlespeeds are becoming as winter bikes and how people praise single pivot full suss.Posted 8 years ago
Mrmo, don’t talk arse.
While there are still climbs out there that I can’t ride up, I will stick with my 22 x 34 lowest thanks.
Sure I could get fitter, but that just means I’ll be able to try steeper and sillier climbs with my nice low gear. Also, try touring with a trailer up and over scottish hills and then decry the low gears.
Horses for courses, if you don’t need low gears, try riding harder trails! 😉Posted 8 years agomrmoMember
13thFloorMonk, Touring is a very very different world to what 99% of riders do. If your shifting loads then it helps. Though i could point out that the first circumnavigation by bike was on an ordinary, one fixed gear…
from my experience 22×34 is actually too low for a lot of climbs too easy to loose traction. Climbs are easier in a slightly bigger gear.
and if you actually look at what is being offered, 26×36 bottom gear… sit down and work out what they translates to…22×30… you loose one maybe two sprockets?Posted 8 years agooldgitMember
Hows the change up from 29 to 36? I mean is it quick, because that was IMO the big problem with the Duo set up.Posted 8 years ago
Imagine you were racing along a flat section using every gear you had, then you came upon a total switchback and climb. Would it bang up quick or are you going to seriously preempt it?
OK, forget the touring thing, i was just using that as one example of why low gears were good (circumnavigating the globe on a fixed gear, do you honestly believe they climbed every steep off road climb they came to? I like to ride my bike, not push it).
Everyone will have a gear setup that works for them, but low gears are totally valid, however fit or otherwise you are.Posted 8 years agotoomanybikesMember
well, myself I’m thinking of using the new 11 speed Campag road cassette with the matching rr deraileur, but to overcome the problem of not having a suitable 11 speed indexing shifter, i was thinking of using an old friction shift thumbshifter, should do the trick, i only ever use a single front chainring, so it’ll be a 1×11, should have a big enough spread for the trails round essex.Posted 8 years ago
Cassettes will be compatible with existing freehubs.
Oldgit: why wouldn’t the shift up to the 36 be smooth? It’s not a massive leap from the previous cog, like a mega-range 7 speed cassette. It is aluminium though, so it may be very flexy! IIRC it goes 32-36 at the top of the block.Posted 8 years agoMr AgreeableSubscriber
10 speed works fine off road as shown by various mate’s cx bikes coping absolutely fine with some horrendous conditions…
In terms of hours of use, even a season of CX races ain’t that much though is it?
Tyre-kicking aside, I’d be interested to know how the front mech works on a setup that’s designed from the ground up for dual ring use. I run 2×9 (but with no big ring) and the chain always seems to be dragging against the front mech if I shift up or down a few gears.
But the real question is, out of all the staff the mag could have sent to preview the latest top-end race groupset, why the one who rides a singlespeed and sings the praises of cheapness? 😉Posted 8 years ago
The topic ‘Sram XX – is 2 x 10 the future?’ is closed to new replies.