Sram GX / XO1 / XX1 12 Speed mileage

[DieselnDust]

https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/The-Hub,2/SRAM-Eagle-chain-longevity-is-impressive,9934

 

Older post and no doubt the Sram chains have great durability, but if the chain checker doesn't fit when it's new, then doesn't it have an advantage to start with?

 

Yes it does start with a design advantage. The concept design is around better fitting parts that therefore promote durability and better performance. A bigger diameter roller fits into the gap between the gear teeth a lot better. That promotes a rolling action of the roller into the tooth dedendum as it engages. Less sliding = less wear. There is no play between the SRAM Eagle chain ring and chain as they mate. 

But the chain is also harder as can be seen by how long it takes the chain to start to wear. Once you've worn through the hard TiN layer the chain still wears slower than other chains. Hence the massive difference in lifespan 

 

 

I didn't see any discussion of sample size there (unless I missed it). What I got was that there were 31 different models of chains and each individual chain was tested twice, no mention of how many chains of each model were tested. (And even then that section was specific to the durability testing rather than the efficiency testing).

 

I'm not sure why you need a baseline when you are doing a relative comparison. If a system loses 5w between crank and rear hub and the exact same system with a different chain loses 10w, where else can the additional 5w come from?

 

a 

A baseline or norm is need to understand what a normal wear rate  and power loss looks like. It will be different for similar chains from the same manufacturer and then by another order of magnitude between different manufacturers. One off tests just tell how that one chain performed against another and not how a family of similar chains performs against another family of also similar chains.  Single samples just tell you you may have got lucky or unlucky in your sample choice.

Only in the latter sample testing can some conclusions be drawn around power loss and longevity.

Believe Muck-off, Ceramic Speed and other similar marketers at your wallets peril. They are very good at making marketing BS sound like science

[Jehosefat]

A baseline or norm is need to understand what a normal wear rate  and power loss looks like. It will be different for similar chains from the same manufacturer and then by another order of magnitude between different manufacturers. One off tests just tell how that one chain performed against another and not how a family of similar chains performs against another family of also similar chains.  Single samples just tell you you may have got lucky or unlucky in your sample choice.

Only in the latter sample testing can some conclusions be drawn around power loss and longevity.

Believe Muck-off, Ceramic Speed and other similar marketers at your wallets peril. They are very good at making marketing BS sound like science

 

Yes, I'm a statistician, I'm well aware of how sampling works. My point was that there was nothing in the article relating to the sample sizes that were used for the efficiency tests. So yes, I agree that a one-off test proves absolutely nothing but your assertion that this was a one-off test has no basis in the article.

 

I still don't get your point about needing a baseline, surely differences in the average power losses between different brands and families of chains is exactly what you are testing for? In that case your average power loss for a certain family of chains is your test result rather than a norm/baseline.

 

I do agree that the article has nowhere enough information in it to reliably conclude that one is better than the other but that may be a case of the writer leaving things out that he did not know/think were relevant rather than the data not being available.

[Christofison]

 

Yes it does start with a design advantage. The concept design is around better fitting parts that therefore promote durability and better performance. A bigger diameter roller fits into the gap between the gear teeth a lot better. That promotes a rolling action of the roller into the tooth dedendum as it engages. Less sliding = less wear. There is no play between the SRAM Eagle chain ring and chain as they mate. 

But the chain is also harder as can be seen by how long it takes the chain to start to wear. Once you've worn through the hard TiN layer the chain still wears slower than other chains. Hence the massive difference in lifespan 

 

 

 

a 

A baseline or norm is need to understand what a normal wear rate  and power loss looks like. It will be different for similar chains from the same manufacturer and then by another order of magnitude between different manufacturers. One off tests just tell how that one chain performed against another and not how a family of similar chains performs against another family of also similar chains.  Single samples just tell you you may have got lucky or unlucky in your sample choice.

Only in the latter sample testing can some conclusions be drawn around power loss and longevity.

Believe Muck-off, Ceramic Speed and other similar marketers at your wallets peril. They are very good at making marketing BS sound like science

 

 

Sounds like your wallet has something to gain, judging by how hard you're fighting this without any counter evidence.

 

Anyway, if the XX1 & XO1 chains were sapping power because of the super tight tolerances not allowing much Ceramic Speed super lube to get to the roller/pin interface in a lab environment, then perhaps out on the trails with regular old Squirt Lube, the opposite would be true by those same tolerances not allowing dirt & grit in???

Edited January 30, 2020 by Christofison

[Jehosefat]

Anyway, if the XX1 & XO1 chains were sapping power because of the super tight tolerances not allowing much Ceramic Speed super lube to get to the roller/pin interface in a lab environment, then perhaps out on the trails with regular old Squirt Lube, the opposite would be true by those same tolerances not allowing dirt & grit in???

 

That's pretty much exactly what the article says. The tight tolerances appear to decrease efficiency but increase durability.

[DieselnDust]

Yes, I'm a statistician, I'm well aware of how sampling works. My point was that there was nothing in the article relating to the sample sizes that were used for the efficiency tests. So yes, I agree that a one-off test proves absolutely nothing but your assertion that this was a one-off test has no basis in the article.

 

I still don't get your point about needing a baseline, surely differences in the average power losses between different brands and families of chains is exactly what you are testing for? In that case your average power loss for a certain family of chains is your test result rather than a norm/baseline.

 

I do agree that the article has nowhere enough information in it to reliably conclude that one is better than the other but that may be a case of the writer leaving things out that he did not know/think were relevant rather than the data not being available.

 

 

The fact that the article does not call out the scientific method means it likely didn't happen according to any scientific method. The absense of the method is not a basis to assume that there was one

 

Sounds like your wallet has something to gain, judging by how hard you're fighting this without any counter evidence.

 

Anyway, if the XX1 & XO1 chains were sapping power because of the super tight tolerances not allowing much Ceramic Speed super lube to get to the roller/pin interface in a lab environment, then perhaps out on the trails with regular old Squirt Lube, the opposite would be true by those same tolerances not allowing dirt & grit in???

 

That's a pretty dumb statement.

 

I don;t need counter evidence to call out a method for being non scientific when the author does not explain the science they used to arrive at their conclusion. It'sup to the author to provide that. As the article is presented it is not representative of anything, it just filler for a magazine.

 

I've never heard of any thing sapping power due to good tolerances. Its not like the rollers use a transition or pressfit is it...

The rollers still roll when you run your hand over them so there's space for lube to work into so I'll call BS on that theory.

 

 

 

[W@nted]

Does anyone have feedback on the mileage possible with the sunrace 12 speed cassette for xd drivers?

[thebob]

I just want to add that after changing my GX chain at 0.5 wear for an X01 chain I am experiencing much smoother shifts both up and down my GX cassette

[Red Bird]

NX chain lasted 1900km for me and it was totally worn. Now on KMC gold/black titanium coated and rainbow xx1, swopping them every 1000km and no sign of wear so far. GX cassette on 2200km and that already beats the poor NX cassette. Started slipping gears after about 2000km. NX is clearly not worth it.

[Pure Savage]

NX chain lasted 1900km for me and it was totally worn. Now on KMC gold/black titanium coated and rainbow xx1, swopping them every 1000km and no sign of wear so far. GX cassette on 2200km and that already beats the poor NX cassette. Started slipping gears after about 2000km. NX is clearly not worth it.

Yeah, sounds about right.

[Dicky DQ]

Well what I have is MTB - KCMC chain, Sunrace 11/50 11 Speed cassette, Absolute black 36 oval front chainring. 3,800km. started getting sloppy shifting between 11/13 and 15/13. so tried to swap chains. Oops. So back on the old chain with sloppy shifting till everything dies.

 

I will just deal with it and save ZAR.

[RiverInTheRoad]

I would also urge people to rather skip NX Eagle. Save for GX or go Shimano SLX.

[nonky]

NX chain lasted 1900km for me and it was totally worn. Now on KMC gold/black titanium coated and rainbow xx1, swopping them every 1000km and no sign of wear so far. GX cassette on 2200km and that already beats the poor NX cassette. Started slipping gears after about 2000km. NX is clearly not worth it.

 

you should get 5,000km's easily out of your GX cassette (with regular chain replacement)

[DieselnDust]

you should get 5,000km's easily out of your GX cassette (with regular chain replacement)

just run the XX1 chain on GX  cassette. Its the best value per km combo if weight is not a criteria.

If weight is a criteria then the XX1 with XO1 cassette

 

for the best longevity the XX1 chain and cassette it the way to go

[Cookie88]

just run the XX1 chain on GX  cassette. Its the best value per km combo if weight is not a criteria.

If weight is a criteria then the XX1 with XO1 cassette

 

for the best longevity the XX1 chain and cassette it the way to go

 

This is what I have done - planning on swapping out my XX1 Chain after 1000km and then popping on a GX Chain to do another 1000km...

[RobertWhitehead]

I currently have 2752.70 km on my XT 1x11 and I measured the chain the other day. It is currently between the 0.75 & 0.5 level. I reckon I could get another 300 - 500 km on the chain and then possibly another 2000km on the cassette by swopping the chain early

[Grease_Monkey]

Just stay on top of your chainwear. On 6000km+ on my XO1 11spd cassette, and 3000km+ on my GX Eagle cassette with no signs of wear yet. I use XX1 chains now, but that was a recent thing after reading a thread somewhwre on the Hub about them - but before that just your standard GX chains for me.

 

What I can say, I am buying alot less chains since going XX1 - it's like it just doesn't stretch at all! Per km, it's by far the cheapest chain.