Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

Sram's New XX1 Group

72K views 476 replies 143 participants last post by  Epic_Dude 
#1 · (Edited)
What is everyones response to the new XX1 Group and idea of 1X11 as a whole?

At first I did the ol eye roll too :rolleyes: .. but after punching some of the gearings into my calculator I began to think it might be something Im looking forward to...

I pretty much ride exclusively 29ers these days, and for me the 10X42 cassette might work perfect with a 28/30 tooth single up front. I currently run 26 low and 36 high with a 11/36 cassette and rarely use my top end...

I wouldn't mind sacrificing a little tiny bit of top end to keep the extra weight off, extra shifting out and simplicity of a 1x11 ;)
 
#49 ·
Honestly, I think most pawl type hubs couldn't handle the torque of a 28/42 combo anyway. I have a feeling only hubs with ?ring drives?, or whatever King and DT use, will be up to the strength standard. I ride with a guy that has a 36t cassette and he shreds cheap SRAM hubs right and left. He could have bought a King about 5 grenaded hubs ago if he added up what he's spent on replacement hubs and wheel builds but he keeps convincing himself he's too broke for a King. Whatever. I don't see 42t cassettes being friendly to the current crop of underengineered hubs out there. SRAM may be protecting their collective butts over tons of accusations of their new stuff blowing up hubs or they may simply be cashing in on a new technology. Either way I'm glad they're doing it;) As a 1xXX fanatic, this is huge news to me! I'm not buying XX level stuff but when X9/XT hits the market I'll have enough saved up and pull that trigger;) Helps I already have a 240s hub:)
 
#52 ·
The force on the chain is less with the bigger cogs on both ends. Otherwise, you are right. Torque at the shafts is the same. Dunno if chain tension difference matters much. May affect shifting a bit. Weight with overall larger gears is slightly higher. It's all trade-offs.

As for XX1, too rich for me.
 
#51 ·
I really don't see how the majority of mtn bikers can possibly need an 11t cog. That's typically the largest gear on road cassettes. On a mountain bike, it's a waste. And the cassette only being compatible with SRAM or DT hubs? Total failure by SRAM thinking the masses are going to pony up $400 or so to test their gear for them.

I'm glad I ride SS, this just looks ridiculous.
 
#56 ·
Pretty sure some folks are misunderstanding the whole XX1 group's purpose. SRAM isn't asking anyone to "test" out new gear ratios, torque loads, designs for weak riders, or making us think we need more gears at all...

The XX1 allow's guys like us running a 2x10 (20 gears) to switch to a 1x11, less total gears, more simplicity, without making any significant changes to the highest and lowest gear ratio's...
 
#55 ·
I'm running a 32 front 36 rear on my new heavy duty 29er. I can get up everything I have tried so far, but I haven't tried the really steep trails yet and I'm pretty sure it's going to be a struggle. Particularly if I'm tired or having an off day or it's a little slick. It's hard to modulate traction with too high of a gear.

I can't run a front der because it will be too far from the rings to shift right and would interfere with my rear linkage. So I'm stuck with 1 ring. Or a middle and a big ring. I can probably engineer some kind of adapter bracket but having a 28 42 would be great.

Personally I enjoy the accomplishment of riding up something that seems unridable. Going up it slowly isn't of concern. Walking up it sucks.

As far as having a 10 tooth high, that is good too for when you need it and have a single smaller ring. That is the whole point. Not to run a big ring with a 10.
 
#57 ·
The "10T is too high", or "42T is too low" arguments seem kind of silly. The cassette offers you a (large) range, and you choose how high or low that range is with the size of the chainring.

11-42 would make a single ring very viable for me, I don't think the 10T is worth the loss of hub compatibility. Here's hoping someone puts out a 10-speed 11-42 version.
 
#59 ·
1-42 would make a single ring very viable for me, I don't think the 10T is worth the loss of hub compatibility. Here's hoping someone puts out a 10-speed 11-42 version.
That would be pretty nice. I run a 36 ring x 11-34 9 speed cassette on my 5" travel bike. Love the single ring w/chain guide. Silent, simple and reliable. And perfect for most of my riding but a couple of the bigger mountains are proving to be quite a challenge. I just need to get stronger I guess!

- Rob
 
#61 ·
I like the fact that front rings can be changed fairly quickly. At some point I would really like to get this. Hopefully it comes down to an x9 pricepoint version at some point. I'd probably never need more than the 28 but would get a 30 or 32 too just in case.

G
 
#63 ·
Where I ride we keep our trails pretty cleared. Besides I've never had grass chew up a cluster. That must be some pretty bad ass grass lol.

I think you all are starting to reach a bit far in trying to come up with things about this this idea to criticize.

The only thing about it that I don't like is that I have to build a dedicated rear wheel to run it and use hubs I usually wouldn't buy. But...oh well. Besides if it does take off some of the smaller hub builders will likely jump on board.
 
#66 ·
Where I ride we keep our trails pretty cleared. Besides I've never had grass chew up a cluster. That must be some pretty bad ass grass lol.

I think you all are starting to reach a bit far in trying to come up with things about this this idea to criticize.
trust me, im not taking a swipe, my main problem with this is bigger clusters/narrow chains in general is that they get clogged up in long grass/heather more than older clusters that are more 'open'. i remember noticing a difference between the spacing (and clogging up) changing from a 6 speed to 7 speed way back when...

riding in scotland and sometimes on very overgrown trails (that only i seem to know exist it would appear).

all for innovation and a fan of sram although im 'all shimano' at the moment.
 
#67 ·
Yeah clogging in extreme conditions may be an issue. Plus I just got my first 10 speed cluster and I noticed that the derailleur and hanger need to be super straight or it doesn't shift worth a shite. So if 10 is worse than 9 which is worse than 8, then 11 might be a real problem if you ever fall on the right side. But we never do that, do we? Yeah right. ;)
 
#69 ·
Im all for this setup ...as a triple 9 speed user when i tried 2 x 10 i just found it much easier to use.....two cogs at the front and ten out back ...less front messing and more rear easiness. (rear always changes easier than front under pressure)

11 speed just sounds better no messy front deraillieur to get stuck with but 11 gears that shift no matter what.

Now the only downside i see is that of early adoption and the price of the cassette and chain every year or so depending on the wear. But thats a similar problem if you buy an XO or XX Cassette they are pretty steep to be throwing money at every year compared to a £50 X9 cassette.
 
#74 ·
Perfectly happy with a 1x10 setup , hell you can run a 2x10 setup for under that price and have it super light weight too .. Seems like a great idea , but personally i feel its a bit too much and over the top . Might as well add a motor now to the bike :madman:... We just need to harden up a bit , practice, and get in better shape .:thumbsup:
 
#79 ·
Well, I'm not going to replace my current drivetrain with this, but the 1x wide range cassette idea has merit and I'm interested to watch it develop. Both with the majors like SRAM and the little guys like Canfield, and presumably Hope, if they're still working on their integrated cassette.

This isn't directed at anyone in particular, but every bike forum I've read has way too much complaining from people about 'the industry' using 'marketing' to try and take their money and make them buy something new (29ers, 650b, tapered steerers, the list goes on). But there are a lot of people looking to buy at any given point, and besides I would guess the majority of bike sales are people buying new complete bikes, rather than enthusiasts building up a frame. I don't remember people complaining about having to buy a new car when side curtain airbags or traction control became common, but any advance in the bike industry has people screaming about being gouged rather than thinking "yeah, that might be cool when I get my next bike in a few years." (edit- like in the "Open letter to the bike industry" thread in Passion... :rolleyes:)
 
#82 ·
What is everyones response to the new XX1 Group and idea of 1X11 as a whole?
I think it is very stupid.

I have been running 1x9 11x36 for a year and I am very happy with it. I would be even much happier with an 11x42 in 9, 10 or 11 speed. Instead SRAM comes out with a 10x42 that requires a new Hub. So whoever wants a 42 rear needs to buy a new shifter, a new cassette (forget the crank) and ... a new wheel :madman::madman::madman::madman:
 
#84 ·
If you've been very happy with your 1x9 11-36, why do you need to change it just because something new comes out? I'm not changing anything, but I would consider a similar drivetrain for my next bike.

Besides, putting XX1 on an existing bike doesn't necessarily require a new hub or wheel. The list of hub manufacturers who are offering compatible freehub bodies seems to grow by the week.

Everyone seems to gloss over the fact that this group is called XX1. It's not X9-1 or whatever they'll call it when it trickles down to more affordable offerings.
 
#86 ·
Not a FAN of SRAM and in fact I secretly wish they'd SCRAM. I don't know what it is maybe it's just me. I just don't like all their hype. Campagnolo out of my price range but I like the fact they design serviceable componentry. Shimano is what I can afford. I like their designs (for the most part) but I think their product has just a few more tiers than needed. I especially don't like Shimanos multiple finishes yeah just try to make your bike look homogeneous with components from different years. I'm a "Keep it Simple" type.

eh..

Hank :rolleyes:
 
#91 ·
If it costs that much it is pretty much out of the question, but the reason to run it has nothing to do with being fashionable. I guess there are guys out there who buy bike parts to be "cool" but I have never met one and personally I have no interest in what others are riding. Usually 95% of them are way behind the curve anyhow. The only reason I would entertain a system like this is because I have bikes that can't run a front derailleur. That's it.

Since I don't need a 32/11 on a 29er around here maybe looking into a smaller front ring in the middle position will get me what I need at a lot less trouble and money. I'll have to do the math and I still won't have crawler gears for super technical but a 28/36 would at least be easier on the knees and suffice most of the time.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top