Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags '1x11'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • The Bike Room
    • Ask Anything
  • Gear & Bikes
    • What bike to buy
    • Technical Q&A
    • New Gear
    • Post Your Bike & Projects
    • Bike Shops & Services
    • Retro / Vintage Bikes
  • Events & Training
    • Events
    • Pro Cycling
    • Training, Health & Nutrition
  • Riding
    • Group Rides
    • Routes & Trails
    • Share Your Ride & Travels
    • Gravity
    • Commuter
    • Multisport
  • Safety & Awareness
    • Stolen Bikes
    • Cycling Safety
    • Fraud Alert
    • Lost & Found
    • Good Causes
  • Help Desk
    • Bike Hub Support
  • Off Topic
    • Chit chat

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Location

Found 21 results

  1. Hi Hubbers I recently took on a (fun) personal project of finding an alternative to the commercially available cover plates used to cover up the frame mounting space left when removing the high direct mount front derailleur for a 1x conversion. After searching the interwebs I cottoned onto a 3D printed plate through options and ideas from Shapeways and the MTBR forums. Shipping for the Shapeways product made it unreasonably expensive for what it is ($6 for the plastic plate, $20 for shipping), so I contacted a few 3D printing companies in Cape Town to see if someone could help me out. And success! I managed to find someone! Following a bit of trial and error with my design I ended up with a plate that I am pretty stoked with!! I have customised it for my Pyga and I think it looks pretty rad! The finish of a 3D print is not the smoothest, but it's hardly noticeable when viewed from a short distance. Best part is it cost a fraction of anything else out there, amped Thoughts on the outcome are welcome and I'm happy to try help anyone out who would be interested in doing the same for their 1x conversion. By this I mean I can either share my 3D file with you (if you can access a 3D printer) or look at getting plates printed through my own source (limited to black or white) and then take it from there. I assume the design would be a universal fit, but have only managed to test it out on the Pyga frame so far. Given that it is also a very recent addition to my bike I have no idea of durability of the part and how it will stand up to the elements (it's made from ABS plastic) but will post future updates here. Fingers crossed it will have some longevity! Overall though I think the project was a success, win!
  2. Today Shimano proudly sets a new mountain biking benchmark, unveiling a genuine market-leading groupset for all enduro, cross-country and trail riders. Revealed for the first time at California´s Sea Otter cycling festival this evening, the new Shimano DEORE XT M8000 raises the bar of the industry´s original mountain bike component groupset to accommodate four distinct mountain biking styles and limitless riding adventures. Click here to view the article
  3. The simplicity of a one-by chain ring setup has always appealed to me. Less cockpit clutter, no chain suck and, for the weight-weenie in me, some grams lost. When the Kitted Wonder Ring arrived for testing I decided to take the plunge and convert my own steed to 1x10. Click here to view the article
  4. I am in the process of replacing chain, cassette, chainring on XX1 and it is damn expensive vs XX (using XT cassette and XT Chain). Any other worth while options that I can consider to make the maintenance cost cheaper on the 1x11 setup (wolftooth, XG1180 cassette, KMC chain)? I bought the bike second hand and the parts were already worn, original owner did not change the chain, so it was unfortunately to late for just a chain swop. Can any of you XX1 riders give me a prediction on the lifespan of an XX1 cassette if I do a regular chain swap?
  5. Hi Guy's Decided going the specialized route and looking at these two options. Marathon has nice group set and comes with swat included as well as two cages. WC is 1x11 which I quite like for simplicity but not sure if I will miss the 2X 10 combo. Getting back into cycling after two year break and need to build fitness from start again.(big accident) Intentions to ride trails and longer events with stage races about twice a year. Opinions and advice greatly appreciated. WC is slightly cheaper than Marathon.
  6. An interesting read: Shimano’s Shifting Philosophy We were given a fresh explanation of Shimano’s drivetrain philosophy at the launch, which actually made sense. Shimano divides all available gear ratios into two groups: “Driving gears” and “Challenge gears.” Driving gears, in the case of a two-by or three-by transmission, are in the middle range of the cassette when the rider is in the big chainring. Challenge gears are for the steepest climbs, when the rider is forced to select the smaller chainrings and to use the larger three cogs of the cassette. In the case of a one-by drivetrain, Driving gears are the first eight cogs on the right-side of the cassette. Shimano professes that the smooth, 10-RPM jumps between shifts generated by its Rhythm Step, 11 by 40-tooth cassette, optimize the efficiency of the driving gears that we use most often for both climbing and pedaling on the flats. While the closer gear ratios of Shimano’s XTR cassette provide smaller steps between most of the gearing range, they cannot attain the higher top and bottom gears of SRAM’s XX1 10 by 42 cassette. To achieve a competitive spread, Shimano “strongly suggests” that XTR customers choose its two-chainring option. Before you whip out your calculators, the closest comparison that a Shimano XTR M9000 two-by drivetrain has to SRAM’s one-by is: Shimano 28 x 38-tooth chainrings, two-by drivetrain: Lowest gear 28/40 = 1.42:1 ratio. Highest gear 38/11 = 1:3.45 ratio. (22 gear selections) SRAM 30-tooth chainring, one-by drivetrain: Lowest gear 30/42 = 1.4:1 ratio. Highest gear 30/10 = 1:3 ratio. (11 gear selections) What the above chart demonstrates is how Shimano’s close-ratio two-by option provides a nearly identical gearing spread when compared to a SRAM XX1 one-by drivetrain. By switching to a 28-tooth chainring, the SRAM one-by drivetrain can also match Shimano’s 26 by 36 option, but Shimano also offers a third, 26 by 36 option for its two-by crankset that provides XTR customers a lower granny gear than SRAM can match (Shimano: Lowest gear 24/40 = 1.66:1 vs SRAM: Lowest gear 28/42 – 1.5:1). The bottom line is that Shimano’s choice for trail gearing is a two-by transmission, and it competes directly with SRAM’s one-by offerings. The customer’s choice is: “Do I want 22 shifts and a front derailleur, or do I want 11 shifts and no front derailleur?” What about Shimano’s One-By XTR Option? One-by customers can choose XTR chainrings between 30 and 36 teeth, but the narrower gearing spread of the 11 x 40, eleven-speed cassette means that riders may need to keep a couple of chainrings in their toolbox to match their gearing to the task at hand. Calculating out Shimano XTR’s lowest-available, 30-tooth-chainring option fetches a low gear of 1.33:1 and a high of 1: 2.73. Compare those figures with the options from SRAM and Shimano that we covered earlier in this segment, and they indicate that hills will be harder to climb, or you will probably be spun out on the flats. Shimano’s one-by gearing options are clearly intended for racers and stronger riders who will probably choose the biggest chainring that they can comfortably push and then suffer with whatever low gear is left when the big climbs arrive. What this says, and its from Shimano themselves, is that their "One-By XTR " option is not anywhere near what SRAM can offer. The 10 x 42 option with SRAM makes more sense vs 11 x 40 from Shimano....unless you like suffering!! this tells me that SRAM is the only option for a single chainring as their spread is better. Shimano still needs two up front or you buy extra Chain rings to swop out if the ride is challenging
  7. An interesting read: Shimano’s Shifting Philosophy We were given a fresh explanation of Shimano’s drivetrain philosophy at the launch, which actually made sense. Shimano divides all available gear ratios into two groups: “Driving gears” and “Challenge gears.” Driving gears, in the case of a two-by or three-by transmission, are in the middle range of the cassette when the rider is in the big chainring. Challenge gears are for the steepest climbs, when the rider is forced to select the smaller chainrings and to use the larger three cogs of the cassette. In the case of a one-by drivetrain, Driving gears are the first eight cogs on the right-side of the cassette. Shimano professes that the smooth, 10-RPM jumps between shifts generated by its Rhythm Step, 11 by 40-tooth cassette, optimize the efficiency of the driving gears that we use most often for both climbing and pedaling on the flats. While the closer gear ratios of Shimano’s XTR cassette provide smaller steps between most of the gearing range, they cannot attain the higher top and bottom gears of SRAM’s XX1 10 by 42 cassette. To achieve a competitive spread, Shimano “strongly suggests” that XTR customers choose its two-chainring option. Before you whip out your calculators, the closest comparison that a Shimano XTR M9000 two-by drivetrain has to SRAM’s one-by is: Shimano 28 x 38-tooth chainrings, two-by drivetrain: Lowest gear 28/40 = 1.42:1 ratio. Highest gear 38/11 = 1:3.45 ratio. (22 gear selections) SRAM 30-tooth chainring, one-by drivetrain: Lowest gear 30/42 = 1.4:1 ratio. Highest gear 30/10 = 1:3 ratio. (11 gear selections) What the above chart demonstrates is how Shimano’s close-ratio two-by option provides a nearly identical gearing spread when compared to a SRAM XX1 one-by drivetrain. By switching to a 28-tooth chainring, the SRAM one-by drivetrain can also match Shimano’s 26 by 36 option, but Shimano also offers a third, 26 by 36 option for its two-by crankset that provides XTR customers a lower granny gear than SRAM can match (Shimano: Lowest gear 24/40 = 1.66:1 vs SRAM: Lowest gear 28/42 – 1.5:1). The bottom line is that Shimano’s choice for trail gearing is a two-by transmission, and it competes directly with SRAM’s one-by offerings. The customer’s choice is: “Do I want 22 shifts and a front derailleur, or do I want 11 shifts and no front derailleur?” What about Shimano’s One-By XTR Option? One-by customers can choose XTR chainrings between 30 and 36 teeth, but the narrower gearing spread of the 11 x 40, eleven-speed cassette means that riders may need to keep a couple of chainrings in their toolbox to match their gearing to the task at hand. Calculating out Shimano XTR’s lowest-available, 30-tooth-chainring option fetches a low gear of 1.33:1 and a high of 1: 2.73. Compare those figures with the options from SRAM and Shimano that we covered earlier in this segment, and they indicate that hills will be harder to climb, or you will probably be spun out on the flats. Shimano’s one-by gearing options are clearly intended for racers and stronger riders who will probably choose the biggest chainring that they can comfortably push and then suffer with whatever low gear is left when the big climbs arrive. What this says, and its from Shimano themselves, is that their "One-By XTR " option is not anywhere near what SRAM can offer. The 10 x 42 option with SRAM makes more sense vs 11 x 40 from Shimano....unless you like suffering!! this tells me that SRAM is the only option for a single chainring as their spread is better. Shimano still needs two up front or you buy extra Chain rings to swop out if the ride is challenging
  8. An interesting read: Shimano’s Shifting Philosophy We were given a fresh explanation of Shimano’s drivetrain philosophy at the launch, which actually made sense. Shimano divides all available gear ratios into two groups: “Driving gears” and “Challenge gears.” Driving gears, in the case of a two-by or three-by transmission, are in the middle range of the cassette when the rider is in the big chainring. Challenge gears are for the steepest climbs, when the rider is forced to select the smaller chainrings and to use the larger three cogs of the cassette. In the case of a one-by drivetrain, Driving gears are the first eight cogs on the right-side of the cassette. Shimano professes that the smooth, 10-RPM jumps between shifts generated by its Rhythm Step, 11 by 40-tooth cassette, optimize the efficiency of the driving gears that we use most often for both climbing and pedaling on the flats. While the closer gear ratios of Shimano’s XTR cassette provide smaller steps between most of the gearing range, they cannot attain the higher top and bottom gears of SRAM’s XX1 10 by 42 cassette. To achieve a competitive spread, Shimano “strongly suggests” that XTR customers choose its two-chainring option. Before you whip out your calculators, the closest comparison that a Shimano XTR M9000 two-by drivetrain has to SRAM’s one-by is: Shimano 28 x 38-tooth chainrings, two-by drivetrain: Lowest gear 28/40 = 1.42:1 ratio. Highest gear 38/11 = 1:3.45 ratio. (22 gear selections) SRAM 30-tooth chainring, one-by drivetrain: Lowest gear 30/42 = 1.4:1 ratio. Highest gear 30/10 = 1:3 ratio. (11 gear selections) What the above chart demonstrates is how Shimano’s close-ratio two-by option provides a nearly identical gearing spread when compared to a SRAM XX1 one-by drivetrain. By switching to a 28-tooth chainring, the SRAM one-by drivetrain can also match Shimano’s 26 by 36 option, but Shimano also offers a third, 26 by 36 option for its two-by crankset that provides XTR customers a lower granny gear than SRAM can match (Shimano: Lowest gear 24/40 = 1.66:1 vs SRAM: Lowest gear 28/42 – 1.5:1). The bottom line is that Shimano’s choice for trail gearing is a two-by transmission, and it competes directly with SRAM’s one-by offerings. The customer’s choice is: “Do I want 22 shifts and a front derailleur, or do I want 11 shifts and no front derailleur?” What about Shimano’s One-By XTR Option? One-by customers can choose XTR chainrings between 30 and 36 teeth, but the narrower gearing spread of the 11 x 40, eleven-speed cassette means that riders may need to keep a couple of chainrings in their toolbox to match their gearing to the task at hand. Calculating out Shimano XTR’s lowest-available, 30-tooth-chainring option fetches a low gear of 1.33:1 and a high of 1: 2.73. Compare those figures with the options from SRAM and Shimano that we covered earlier in this segment, and they indicate that hills will be harder to climb, or you will probably be spun out on the flats. Shimano’s one-by gearing options are clearly intended for racers and stronger riders who will probably choose the biggest chainring that they can comfortably push and then suffer with whatever low gear is left when the big climbs arrive. What this says, and its from Shimano themselves, is that their "One-By XTR " option is not anywhere near what SRAM can offer. The 10 x 42 option with SRAM makes more sense vs 11 x 40 from Shimano....unless you like suffering!! this tells me that SRAM is the only option for a single chainring as their spread is better. Shimano still needs two up front or you buy extra Chain rings to swop out if the ride is challenging
  9. Had a really long day at Ironman this year... 5 years of bike hassles in 180kms.... Best be forgotten Nonetheless - this got me thinking. Why does no-one ride a 1-11 setup on a TT bike? Answers to my own questions would be: minimal weight saving (Cabling, derailleur, chainring, shifter etc...dont add up to much) Any weight saving would be reduced by having to add a chain guide Gap between gears is too large. Optimal cadence is in a very narrow range of maybe 5 rpm (not sure what Sheldon Brown says about this) My situation further compounded by running Osymmetric (not Rotor etc...) front rings. Thoughts?
  10. I have been invited to ride S2S in 2015. I currently Ride a 2 x 10 XT setup with a 38 / 24 front and 36 / 11 Rear. Bike is a BMC TE02 and Medium hard tail. I am upgrading my frame to a BMC TE01 and as my current drivetrain is worn I am looking to change to XTR 2x10 or XX1 1x11. I am 181 cm tall, 83 kg. 39 years old. I am a fit rider as confirmed by VO2 max testing done at the Prime institute in Durban. I race XC marathon and I am competitive in my age category. As far a technical ability I can ride the trails at Karkloof (the difficult options) with my XC Hard tail setup. I am very comfortable on the 2x 10 but the 1x 11 has undeniable advantages. I am going to be racing Sani and have never ridden it so would appreciate any info that you guys could give me. I am obviously concerned of not having a low enough gear for really steep climbs, I also don't want to spin the hell out of my legs to go any where. What can you tell me.... Thanks Ryan
  11. So I'm considering to start a new build later this year... However, last time that I bought / built a bike, 3x9 was the standard and you basically only had to choose between LX, XT and XTR based on what your budget would allow, or equivalently X7, X9 or X0 if you were in the SRAM camp. These days there's all the talk about 2X10's, 1X11, Clutch derailleurs etc. I'm a big fan of simplicity, so I'm quite excited about the 1X11 options out there, but from my understanding this is only available on the top end groupsets. Can anybody give a run-own on what options are available out there? i.e. can you purchase a SLX groupset in a 1 X 11 configuration? Can you buy a XT clutch derailleur, or are these options only available on the top end stuff? Reason I'm asking, is I place a higher value on having a good frame, good shock & fork and good wheels whilst caring less about my groupset e.g. being a SLX rather than a XTR, but want to know if I will be compromising my options.
  12. " We proudly introduce: the new rider tuned XTR M9000 groupset!! Press release: http://po.st/NewXTR " http://velonews.competitor.com/2014/04/mtb/shimano-goes-1x11-new-xtr-9000_323833
  13. OK I sick of my front derailer. I seriously want a xx 1x11 but cannot afford it, converting to a 1x10 could have hidden problems. This part for R2200 from Chris Willimse may hold the answers, One problem it says it replaced the 4 bigger sprockets, should it not be 3 Biggest Sprockets. Anyone with experience, advise. http://www.cwcycles.co.za/product/leo-general-lee-42t?quicktabs_1=1#quicktabs-1
  14. I am looking to upgrade my Santa Cruz LTc to 1x11. I do mostly ride marathon and and stage racing. Epic again this year. What size chainring would you recommend? I am thinking 32 or 34. Any suggestions?
  15. Ok, thankfully prices have come down despite the ZAR weakness (albeit more of late). However, there appear to be a few alternatives to the rather expensive SRAM XX1/X01 that r not being advertised. Is an XT groupo at R8k reasonable? There are now Shim clutch options that put a 1x11in reasonable reach. So are the other existing groupo options reasonable?
  16. Specialized launched their 2014 models in Seefeld Austria. As usual some really groundbreaking stuff from this market leader. The Epic has had some small changes but most noticeably is the XC and Marathon versions. This XC S-Works model is running 1X11 with 90 mm of travel. http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7320/9311014717_57bacd153a_b.jpg IMG_3330 by OddPix1, on Flickr This is the Epic Comp Aluminium. Great ride. http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2808/9311023461_220f29030b_b.jpg IMG_3342 by OddPix1, on Flickr
  17. HI Guys! Please give me your opinion on the following. At this stage it is for interest sake but it might help change my mind I am in the process of converting to 1x10. The costs for this will be as follows: 32T woolf chainring: R895 General Lee converter: R1950 XT cassette: R795 (currently have xtr but converter don't fit on xtr) XT chain: R395 Would you guys go for the above or just upgrade to 1x11. I will keep my crank and the woolf chainring I already have and get the following X01 cluster from CRC: R3166 X01 rear derailer from CRC R3166 With dhl shipping and tax the above 2 items will be R6085 Add XX1 gripshift: R1690 XX1 chain R590 In total it will be R4035 for the convertion and about R8365 for the upgrade What's your opinion?
  18. When SRAM first introduced the XX1 it was met with scepticism. But what was first looked at as weird has turned out to work, so well that SRAM has decided to expand on that idea and offer the 1x11 drivetrain in cheaper X0 form. Click here to view the article
  19. I am currently using a 2x10 and have been toying with the idea of changing to the SRAM 1x11 as the new XO1 is somewhat more within my price range! The question I have to you guys that have been riding the 1x11 is what size chain ring are you using? I ask this because the XX! spider allow a range of chain rings from a 36 all the way down to a 28. The XO1 has a different spider and the smallest that can be fitted is a 30. Is 30 small enough on a 29 for South Africa terrain?? The SRAM guys comment that we here do not need the 28, and in fact most people are using a 32 or 34. I am not a Pro so would appreciate feedback from "normal" guys!! .
  20. Anyone know off-hand the compatibility between the SRAM 2x10 XX and X0 cranksets in terms of 'spiders' and chain rings? Are they interchangeable? Doing my 1st 2x10 build -decisions, decisions, decisions! Also, what are your thoughts in terms of 170 vs 175mm crank length? I am thinking 170 might just make it easier on the climbs. I am going to need that on the 2x10. Q Factor? 156 or 164? Its a 26" Flash frame that's going 650b, thinking of 26/39 rings. BB30 or PressFit-30? Please no suggestions of 1x11, not ready for that yet.
  21. http://www.bikeradar...es-to-11-34098/ SRAM XX1 prototype spotted - this one goes to 11 http://cdn.mos.bikeradar.com/images/news/2012/05/24/1337856740662-1i2n16yr7v5y7-280-75.jpg We’d long heard rumblings of a new 11-speed mountain bike group coming from SRAM. We expected it to be an updated XX with a wider range that more closely replicated a conventional triple. Instead, SRAM have developed a progressive, dedicated, single-ring 11-speed group called XX1. The company hope it will change mainstream thinking in terms of mountain bike drivetrains. We happened to score an in-depth look at the prototype during our recent visit to SRAM’s European headquarters, where we got a lengthy sit-down with drivetrain product manager Chris Hilton. We also got to pedal the bits around a little, too. What is the XX1? SRAM aren’t pitching XX1 as having 11 speeds. Instead, they’re describing it as a 1x drivetrain that just happens to have 11 cogs out back. The heart of the XX1 concept is its ultra-wide, 10-42T cassette, which provides a generous 420 percent range. That still falls short of the XX’s rough 470 percent but it’s a big improvement over current 1x10 drivetrains that many riders already run. In essence, the XX1 cassette adds a gear on either end of a current XX cassette while retaining reasonable jumps in between. “We’re not trying to start an 11-speed war,” Hilton says. “A 1x11 war? Fine, but a 2x11 war isn’t beneficial to anybody.” SRAM also don’t intend for the XX1 to replace current 2x10 groups. Instead, they’re aiming it at trail and enduro riders who are often already strong enough to power a single-ring drivetrain. The target group often also place a major emphasis on chain retention and impact protection with dedicated guides and bashguards. Nonetheless, SRAM are fully expecting a smaller faction of forward-thinking cross-country riders to jump on board as well. As well as being simpler and more secure than the XX, the XX1 is also lighter. Target production groups are 200-300g relative to the ultra-light XX. “Almost all of that is from omission, not from anything getting lighter,” Hilton tells BikeRadar. So there shouldn’t be any drop in overall durability, either. Final pricing is still to be determined but SRAM plan to launch the XX1 later this summer. New cassette, new freehub body The XX1 cassette construction is very similar to that of XX, mostly machined from a single block of steel to form a hollow, domed structure. That dome is then capped with an aluminum innermost cog – in this case, one that’s much more dished than the one on XX. This also transfers all the drive torque to the splined freehub body. Instead of having the smallest cog as a separate bit, XX1’s 10-tooth cog is now integrated into the rest of the steel structure. Squeezing on a 10-tooth cog required some doing, as it’s too small in diameter to fit on a conventional freehub body. So, SRAM created a new ‘XD’ driver body that’s essentially a slight modification of what’s currently in use. The end where a conventional lockring would normally thread into is lopped off. And almost all the splines on the outside of the body are shaved smooth to leave a mostly bare cylinder. A Delrin-lined aluminum locking ‘tube’ replaces the conventional lockring. The ‘tube’ snaps into the inside of the 10-tooth cog but is otherwise free to rotate. Threads at the inner edge then match up to new threads added just outboard of the remaining freehub body splines. The Delrin lining is sized to provide a light press-fit on the freehub cylinder. When it’s all secured, the locking tube keeps everything firmly concentric on the freehub body, with no chance of cogs digging into its surface. It’s not very different to how a non-driveside SRAM GXP crank arm attaches to a bottom bracket spindle. Because all the freehub body modifications are restricted to the exterior, an XD body can be adapted to current hub designs with no changes to things like axles, bearings and spoke flange spacings. http://cdn.mos.bikeradar.com/images/news/2012/05/24/1337856667749-wodp4wp08it2-670-70.jpg The XX1 cassette fits onto a modified XD cassette body For now, wheels will be available from SRAM and DT Swiss only. Hub spacing will remain unchanged at 135mm or 142mm. Licenses to other makes are under discussion, but given the prevalence of DT Swiss drivers in other companies’ wheels that should open things up to the likes of Specialized, Reynolds, Enve Composites right away. XX1’s 11-speed cog spacing will be unique to the group, however, and isn’t shared with 11-speed offerings from Shimano (more on that soon) or Campagnolo. Of course, there’s a dedicated 11-speed chain as well, with a slightly narrower external width. Inner plate spacing and roller width are unchanged from SRAM’s 10-speed chains, though. So wear supposedly isn’t adversely affected. Straight P derailleurs The XX1’s rear derailleur will signal a radical departure from current designs. With a conventional slant parallelogram the derailleur body simultaneously moves the cage in and out as well as up and down. But the XX1 will use a so-called “straight P” layout where the body only moves along the horizontal plane. It’s an idea Hilton admits has been floating around within SRAM for the past eight years but is only now seeing the light of day with the rise of 1x drivetrains. Hilton acknowledges that a straight parallelogram is counterintuitive. One would assume that the derailleur body should follow the contours of the cassette, but the XX1 cassette’s extreme gear range and tighter cog spacing necessitated a change in thinking. “Originally, the first prototype of this was built for a downhill bike,” Hilton says. “We built it because when bikes hit bumps, the derailleur absorbs the shock of that chain. 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. We’ve compensated for that [in current Type 2 rear derailleurs] by not decreasing our spring tension in derailleurs.” Because XX1 doesn’t rely on a slant parallelogram to control chain gap, the upper pulley is now hugely offset from the lower derailleur body knuckle. As the chain shifts across the range, more or less chain is wrapped around the cassette, pulling the cage fore and aft and the upper pulley up and down. XX1 will only be offered with a single 10-42T cassette ratio, so that upper pulley pivot offset could be precisely calculated to keep chain gap consistent across the entire range. “The chain gap is exactly the same in every single cog no matter what cog you’re in, even if you were to change the cassette, because it’s driven by the amount of free chain length,” explains Hilton. The XX1’s “straight P” design also means it will only work with a single-ring crank. Likewise, suspension designs with lots of chainstay growth could be problematic. Other details include an integrated cable pulley at the rear of the derailleur, just like on Avid’s long-defunct Rollamajig. This decreases cable friction. We expect production units to be built with cold-forged parallelogram plates and a carbon-fiber pulley cage. The 1x11 concept doesn’t require a huge re-engineering of shifters. Therefore, XX1 models will essentially be the same as current trigger and Grip Shift offerings, albeit with different badging, an extra click and specific internal spacing. No chainguide? XX1 was conceived as a single-ring drivetrain, allowing engineers to rethink the chainrings as well. Conventional 2x or 3x chainrings are designed with elaborately shaped teeth to improve shift performance. But this also affects ability to retain the chain on bumpy terrain. “As we make chainrings shift faster and smoother, we’re taking material away, making them more expensive, limiting their lifespan and potentially affecting chain retention capability,” says Hilton. “There's no question that making a chain shift makes a chain fall off.” As a result, XX1’s chainring teeth are unusually tall and quite squared-off, similar to those found on dedicated singlespeed rings. However, they’re also built with alternating tooth thicknesses that are syncronized with the gaps in the chain – slightly narrower to fit between inner chain plates, and wider to take advantage of the extra space between outer chain plates. Combined with XX1’s improved chainline, Hilton claims this improves chain retention to the point that you won’t need any sort of guide in most applications, while also slowing down wear and reducing drivetrain noise. Hilton admits that aggressive trail and enduro riders might still choose to run some sort of minimal upper guide, if only for peace of mind. “I like to say that chain retention is sort of like birth control – there are various levels of safety,” he quipped. “You could choose to use a full-on X0 DH guide with bash protection and a lower roller in addition to this whole system. But that would be like abstinence. http://cdn.mos.bikeradar.com/images/news/2012/05/24/1337856740674-xgv9mcuxqwbt-670-70.jpg The XX1 drivetrain fits in well with the 'new school' of trail bike kit, which includes wide bars and short stems The synchronized design of the chainring teeth will limit the XX1’s chainring choices to even numbers. But the overall range is admirably broad – all the way from 28-38T. That variation will require a dedicated bolt circle diameter, but the spider will be shaped so that users won’t have to remove the cranks to swap rings. The production crank will feature hollow carbon-fiber arms and be offered in both narrow and wide stance widths (we’re guessing 156mm and 166mm, as for current XX cranks). 1x11 drivetrains: the bonuses Why go to all this trouble just to eliminate a chainring, though? Don’t current 2x10 systems already work well enough? That all depends on who you ask. It’s true that modern two-ring drivetrains work well. But they still can’t match the security of single-ring setups, which are increasingly finding favor in the mainstream marketplace, especially with more aggressive riders. If you need proof of that, just note the explosion of two-ring chainguide models in recent years. Moreover, single-ring drivetrains are simpler and lighter, as well as less confusing to newer riders. Hilton doesn’t refute the idea of eventually bringing the 1x11 concept to much lower price points. And XX1’s gearing range sounds generous enough to be useful for a wide swathe of riders. “As long as you choose your range properly, this type of system is applicable to a majority of people,” Hilton says. “It’s not intended to replace 2x10. Some people need a bigger range, and that’s fine – we still have 2x10. But if you’re Ross Schnell or various other people, this is a radically improved 1x10.” Hilton also points to the difficulties an OEM company can face in terms of getting front derailleurs to play nicely with the huge range of rear suspension designs. “Front derailleurs are limiting because there are so many choices,” Hilton says. “It’s limiting because of where you can move the wheel to, where the suspension pivots are placed, where the cable routing comes from – all those things are limitations to a drivetrain. Front derailleurs are one of the most expensive engineering and tooling costs on a bicycle, yet it’s the first place manufacturers go to cut money.” So why not use a 2x11 setup? Combined with that 10-42T cassette, such a drivetrain could easily replicate the full range of a traditional triple but with the advantages of a double. “2x11 is certainly feasible – it’s not impossible,” Hilton says, though he also adds that the cassette’s added width presents problems with chainline if more than one chainring is used. “11-speed is a by-product of wanting to make a wider-range cassette without funky steps in there. We want to sell it as a 1x drivetrain solution that just happens to have 11 gears. The eleventh gear becomes problematic because the overall spacing is now wider.” Could the XX1 concept be further expanded with a revamped HammerSchmidt or high-performance, internally geared setup, though? Hilton doesn’t rule out that possibility but says it’s not imminent. Either way, XX1 sounds awfully appealing on paper. And after a brief test ride inside SRAM’s Schweinfurt facility, in Germany, it certainly seems to work. We’ve been promised parts for testing in the near future so we’ll know for sure soon. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”…Edmund Burke
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout