Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 98
  1. #1
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847

    SRAM X.9 = The weakest link?

    3 weeks old. JRA. Caught a small branch (< 1/2" in diameter). All the king's horses, etc., and all of the tools in my Camelbak weren't going to be putting this mess back together. 4 mile walk out. Great time.

    15 years on Shimano rear derailleurs, including the last 7 on '98 XT 8-spd, and never a problem (aside from waning availabilty of compatable replacement parts!)

    FINALLY decide to 'upgrade' to 9 speed and give SRAM a shot. Not a good first impression, to say the least.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  2. #2
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847

    two more pics

    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    3 weeks old. JRA. Caught a small branch (< 1/2" in diameter). All the king's horses, etc., and all of the tools in my Camelbak weren't going to be putting this mess back together. 4 mile walk out. Great time.

    15 years on Shimano rear derailleurs, including the last 7 on '98 XT 8-spd, and never a problem (aside from waning availabilty of compatable replacement parts!)

    FINALLY decide to 'upgrade' to 9 speed and give SRAM a shot. Not a good first impression, to say the least.
    Here's a couple more shots:
    Attached Images Attached Images
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  3. #3
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    hah! Thats where the older 9.0's used to break constantly. Guess they never figured that one out.

  4. #4
    Saving lives with knives.
    Reputation: frank daleview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    909
    Ouch!

  5. #5
    nnn
    nnn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nnn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    799
    If it ain't broke don't fix it...I'm riding with LX since years ago and have never needed to replace/reallign/ask-it-nicely-to-work etc etc

  6. #6
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by nnn
    If it ain't broke don't fix it...I'm riding with LX since years ago and have never needed to replace/reallign/ask-it-nicely-to-work etc etc
    Oh, believe me, I hear ya. I'd been running XT 8 spd stuff on all of my bikes since '98 and I squeeze a ridiculous number of years/miles out of every part. Just happened this time around that EVERYTHING on my current 'main' bike's drivetrain was completely worn out. Shifters, cassette, chainrings, chain, derailleur spring & pulleys...you name it. After 3 solid years of 4-seasons riding, everything had to go.

    I looked for increasingly obscure 8-spd xt shifter pods. Used to buy them from Jenson for $59/set f & r. Now, they're at least $50 each (speedgoat). After much scouring of the web for 8 spd parts at reasonable prices, I said "wtf? This is getting ridiculous!"

    Picked up the X.9 triggers and rear derailleur for $119 at Pricepoint. Got a pretty good deal on all of the other parts I needed and, in a few days, I was rolling w/ 9 spd. Worked really well for 3 weeks, then this.

    If I could have kept riding 8-spd forever, I would have. The other 'problem' with shimano being that XT stuff continues to get more and more expensive every year. Hell, today's xt costs nearly as much as xtr from just a couple years ago.

    *shrug* I thought I'd give SRAM a chance. Guess that's what I get. FWIW, I already ordered a replacement LX rear derailleur, and a pair of Attack triggers, since the x.9s I have aren't shimano compatible. Had to get something while I wait for responses from SRAM and Pricepoint telling me that they won't replace the der. under warranty.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  7. #7
    Rat Fink
    Reputation: mbmojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,135
    Bad metal. Stuff is crystallized and is definitely a manufacturing defect. Send it back for replacement.
    .
    Raspberries, nature's poison ivy bait. (Formerly, 'Stops to eat the raspberries.')

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,071
    When you get a stick in your derailleur, something breaks. Sometimes it's the derailleur, sometimes it's the hanger. It's just part of mountain biking. Buy a new derailleur and get back on the trails.

    I've actually had a lot better luck with the SRAM derailleurs than Shimanos. Went through about a dozen Shimano derailleurs last year between my trailbike and FR bike, got SRAM last fall and haven't toasted one yet. The Shimanos seem to wear out and get sloppy a lot faster (only a couple actually broke).

  9. #9
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by watermoccasin
    When you get a stick in your derailleur, something breaks. Sometimes it's the derailleur, sometimes it's the hanger. It's just part of mountain biking.
    Couldn't disagree more. I've caught plenty of sticks (and rocks, etc) in the last decade and a half of riding off-road and have NEVER broken a derailleur or hanger...until now. I bent one aluminum hanger on my '94 M2, but that's it.

    ! weigh 150 lb, and ride with more finesse than brute force. The stick that destroyed the derailleur in question was about the size of my pinky. Granted, I shouldn't have hit it (duh) but the damage seems to far exceed the actual amount of force that could have been placed on the derailleur.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  10. #10
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by mbmojo
    Bad metal. Stuff is crystallized and is definitely a manufacturing defect. Send it back for replacement.
    Not.
    Curious though how you came up with that scientific analysis from the photo?

  11. #11
    Rat Fink
    Reputation: mbmojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,135
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    Not.
    Curious though how you came up with that scientific analysis from the photo?
    Sure looks like it in the pics. Enlighten me.
    .
    Raspberries, nature's poison ivy bait. (Formerly, 'Stops to eat the raspberries.')

  12. #12
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by mbmojo
    Sure looks like it in the pics. Enlighten me.
    No, enlighten me. You made the analysis that the mateial is crystallized. How'd you do that?

  13. #13
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    No, enlighten me. You made the analysis that the mateial is crystallized. How'd you do that?
    No need to be a douche bag about it. Let me answer for him:

    He looked at the pics. The metal in and around the break 'looks' like a conglomerate of crystalline particles. Whether this is typical or not is secondary.

    Christ, talk about looking for an argument!
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  14. #14
    Rat Fink
    Reputation: mbmojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,135
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    No, enlighten me. You made the analysis that the mateial is crystallized. How'd you do that?
    What a freakin' pantload.
    .
    Raspberries, nature's poison ivy bait. (Formerly, 'Stops to eat the raspberries.')

  15. #15
    Chrome Toaster
    Reputation: Hecubus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,850
    Thats what a cast alloy typically looks like when it breaks. How exactly does cast al become "crystalized"?

  16. #16
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    No need to be a douche bag about it. Let me answer for him:

    He looked at the pics. The metal in and around the break 'looks' like a conglomerate of crystalline particles. Whether this is typical or not is secondary.

    Christ, talk about looking for an argument!
    No need to be a double douche bag about it, right back at ya.

    It was a legitimate question. I'm curious how he made the analysis that it's a manufacturing defect due to crystalized material.

  17. #17
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by mbmojo
    What a freakin' pantload.
    Good Ad Hominem.

  18. #18
    Rat Fink
    Reputation: mbmojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,135
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    It was a legitimate question. I'm curious how he made the analysis that it's a manufacturing defect due to crystalized material.
    When metal is cast or heat treated and isn't cooled properly, the grain becomes very course and crystalline in nature. Things made from that metal tend to be brittle and can easily break in a manner similar to what is shown in the picture. That part doesn't seem to be something that would normally be heat treated so it's probably cast.

    Either that or the part was made from pot metal. (zinc)
    .
    Raspberries, nature's poison ivy bait. (Formerly, 'Stops to eat the raspberries.')

  19. #19
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    Good Ad Hominem.
    Here's a thought: Instead of bustin' out the latin and rolling on the floor, why don't you explain to mbmojo why it's normal for cast aluminum alloy to be both crystaline and porous?
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  20. #20
    Rat Fink
    Reputation: mbmojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    Here's a thought: Instead of bustin' out the latin and rolling on the floor, why don't you explain to mbmojo why it's normal for cast aluminum alloy to be both crystaline and porous?
    I thought I asked that question.

    Is it typical for aluminum the grain to be that course?
    .
    Raspberries, nature's poison ivy bait. (Formerly, 'Stops to eat the raspberries.')

  21. #21
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by mbmojo
    When metal is cast or heat treated and isn't cooled properly, the grain becomes very course and crystalline in nature. Things made from that metal tend to be brittle and can easily break in a manner similar to what is shown in the picture. That part doesn't seem to be something that would normally be heat treated so it's probably cast.

    Either that or the part was made from pot metal. (zinc)
    Actually, all metals are crystalline when in the solid state. Some have tighter crystal structures than others.

    Cast aluminum or zinc when broken will appear to be highly "crystalline". Even if "cooled" properly. It's the nature of the material. It doesn't mean there was a manufacturing defect worthy of replacement.

  22. #22
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    Here's a thought: Instead of bustin' out the latin and rolling on the floor, why don't you explain to mbmojo why it's normal for cast aluminum alloy to be both crystaline and porous?
    Funny that you bust on me yet I'm not the one bustin' out the name calling.

    mbmojo didn't ask that. "What a freakin' pantload" Doesn't quite give the impression of wanting input. I merely wanted clarification on his analysis. I didn't realize that was such a big deal.

  23. #23
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by mbmojo
    I thought I asked that question.

    Is it typical for aluminum the grain to be that course?
    No you didn't, and yes it's very typical. In fact cast aluminum will pretty much always appear that way when broken.

  24. #24
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    Funny that you bust on me yet I'm not the one bustin' out the name calling.

    mbmojo didn't ask that. "What a freakin' pantload" Doesn't quite give the impression of wanting input. I merely wanted clarification on his analysis. I didn't realize that was such a big deal.
    I wasn't 'bustin' on you. My point was that, instead of coming to the thread with little to add aside from picking apart someone else's opinion and starting a little 'I know more than you but I'm not telling' pissing match, you could contribute something worthwhile to the discussion. I'm neither metallurgist nor engineer. I'm a chemist, and I know a little about the properties of metals but, honestly, I'm not in the business of breaking bike parts and probably wouldn't be able to tell a 'routine' break from a 'defect'

    If somebody posts something that you know or suspect to be untrue, then educate the person, for the benefit of everyone else reading the thread. Otherwise, it's just a waste of space.

    All that said, I sure hope the derailleur's 'defective' (even though I suspect it isn't, aside from being inherently weak in a critical area), 'cos I'd hate to think they all snap so easily.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  25. #25
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    I wasn't 'bustin' on you. My point was that, instead of coming to the thread with little to add aside from picking apart someone else's opinion and starting a little 'I know more than you but I'm not telling' pissing match, you could contribute something worthwhile to the discussion.
    Was not my intention. His original statement "Stuff is crystallized and is definitely a manufacturing defect" Sounded like he was confident in his "diagnosis". All I wanted to know was how he came up with that. Maybe he knew something I didn't.

    I'm neither metallurgist nor engineer. I'm a chemist, and I know a little about the properties of metals but, honestly, I'm not in the business of breaking bike parts and probably wouldn't be able to tell a 'routine' break from a 'defect'
    I'm an engineer, but not a metallurgist. I don't know of any ways to tell a routine break from a defect from a picture. Hence wanting to know more info from mbmojo.


    All that said, I sure hope the derailleur's 'defective' (even though I suspect it isn't, aside from being inherently weak in a critical area), 'cos I'd hate to think they all snap so easily.
    Sorry to say but I think you're SOL.

  26. #26
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    Was not my intention. His original statement "Stuff is crystallized and is definitely a manufacturing defect" Sounded like he was confident in his "diagnosis". All I wanted to know was how he came up with that. Maybe he knew something I didn't
    Maybe. But when he posted this:

    "Sure looks like it in the pics. Enlighten me."


    You could have just done what he asked and provided some info (as you did in a later post), instead of holding out in the hopes that he'd dig himself deeper into a hole so you could point and laugh and use $0.10 words. (name-calling notwithstanding)

    Anyway...
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  27. #27
    SALLGUD
    Reputation: azdrawdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    449
    Here's my JRA X-9 rear derailleur. Unreal. I had always used Shimano before, and went back to them immediately after this "incident".

    Michael
    Attached Images Attached Images

  28. #28
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    Maybe. But when he posted this:

    "Sure looks like it in the pics. Enlighten me."

    You could have just done what he asked and provided some info
    Except, he didn't answer my question of how he got that analysis from the photo. There was nothing for me to "enlighten" him on. "Sure looks like it in the pics", with a touch of sarcasm "Enlighten me" doesn't quite say how he determined it from the photo.

    Anyway....

  29. #29
    Trying to find Flow
    Reputation: Patchito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,514
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    Good Ad Hominem.
    Jeezus!! Would you stop abusing Latin already? It's a dead language. Let it rest in peace without trying to use it inappropriately (and ad nauseum) every time you want to get in a flame war. It's starting to get kind of embarrasing.

  30. #30
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    Except, he didn't answer my question of how he got that analysis from the photo. There was nothing for me to "enlighten" him on. "Sure looks like it in the pics", with a touch of sarcasm "Enlighten me" doesn't quite say how he determined it from the photo.

    Anyway....
    Please, man. Analysis? He looked at the pic, thought it looked odd, and assumed it was due to a defect in the material. If I didn't know better, I'd be inclined to agree with him based solely on the way the thing looks as I hold it in front of me; mangled and 'stretched' and cracked in ways I've never seen (details hard to discern from the pics, but still...). It doesn't take a rocket scientist, an engineer, or a chemist to figure out that people sometimes post things on the internet without having all the answers to back up their claims. Whether he's right or not is practically irrelavent at this point, because it seems all you want out of him is an admission of his own ignorance. To what end? Protecting the public-at-large from misinformation? Saving SRAM's reputation? Nah, it seems like you're being a bit more malicious here, but I could be wrong.

    Anyway, I digress...it's a dead horse. How 'bout we stop beating it now?
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  31. #31
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Patchito
    Jeezus!! Would you stop abusing Latin already?
    ahblay ahblay ahblay
    Ogay omewheresay elseway andway ewspay.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: badlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    293

    My 2 cents

    Looking at (note the limiter) both pictures of failed ders, it appears that both failed at not unreasonable places on the castings. Both were (this is too obvious) subjected to forces beyond what they could stand.

    It is a fact of life that stuff breaks while riding. A rear der is hanging out there off the side of the bike and can really be extended, making a moment-arm that has a lot of leverage (think potential torque). I don't think - again just looking at the picts - that these failures are unreasonable. These parts are put on thousands and thousands of bikes each year. Some break. Ditto for Shimano - do a search. Just because it has never happened to you in 1500 years of riding a bike does not mean that sram makes defective parts. The "JRA and the manufacturer is crap" argument has been used so many times that it is just too tedious to endure.

    It is impossible to analyze the failure mode - manufacturing defect or over-stress usage - by looking at a picture and reading a description. It is akin to doing a medical diagnosis from the senate floor. Impossible. You need a lab. Anyone who can determine metallurgical failure by looking at a picture has a wonderful, high-paying career at the company of his or her choice because it is a skill that no one I ever heard of has. I would put one exception to this - a VERY experienced metallurgist working with the same type of material, literally for the same company that makes the parts, that has examined many similar failures of the same part in a lab and has developed an opinion of how these fail based on that experience. But someone with that experience would more than likely say "I need to see the part to make an analysis."

    I believe that what happened is that you took a stick in the rear der, and it broke. No warranty. Buy another. Brand is your choice.

    Can't blame sram for that one. If you want to blame sram, get the part to an independant met lab and have a determination done. Take it to a College or University that teaches metallurgy and see if they will do the analysis for free. You may have to buy them a few known good samples for comparision, maybe not.

    And yes, I am an engineer. No, I do not work in metallurgy. Yes, I have had metallurgy training. Yes, I do consult. No, not on this one, it is too obvious and you can't afford me. No, I am not giving an engineering opinion on the failure, only saying it needs in-depth metallurgical analysis to determine if there is a manufacturing defect. Yes, the obvious failure mode from the descriptions given is over-stress, but to make the determination with any degree of confidence would require that analysis. Your right, this is very amusing. No, I am not intentionally trying to be sarcastic or demeaning, and my apologies if you take it that way.

    Hope this helps.

    Rick

  33. #33
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by badlander
    Hope this helps.

    Rick
    Thanks for the reply. For what it's worth, I don't think that I ever tried to 'blame' SRAM for the failure. I wan't trying to bash SRAM. I know people who've sworn by their products for years. I started the thread because I was curious if others had similar experience with the X-9. Sure, I know that people have destroyed derailleurs from every manufacturer, and I'm aware that coincidences do occur (i.e. I switch der. manufacturers after 15 yrs and break a derailleur 3 wks later...could simply be that 'my time' was up, these things happen, etc.) Some would tell me to shut up and be happy that I've only broken one derailleur in all that time. Such is life, and my experience may not be the same as someone else's...

    I did write that I 'hoped' it was a defect (because it snapped so quickly and easily) but also that it most likely isn't defective. Whether it's design is inherently weaker, more brittle, or more prone to failure than a comparable Shimano derailleur, I'm not really qualified to say with certainty, but I chalk this up to a 'bad' experience with the X-9. Sh!t happens? Sure. Doesn't mean I'll go singing and dancing to the LBS to get another X-9!

    If SRAM won't replace it, that's their decision. However, that decision would only add to the bad taste in my mouth re: their product and customer support.

    I'll continue to use their shifters for the time being, but the replacement derailleur that's on it's way is a Shimano, fwiw.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  34. #34
    tlg
    tlg is offline
    (enter witty phrase here)
    Reputation: tlg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    I'll continue to use their shifters for the time being, but the replacement derailleur that's on it's way is a Shimano, fwiw.
    Same shifters used for the X.9 derailleur? Won't be Shimano compatible.

  35. #35
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by tlg
    Same shifters used for the X.9 derailleur? Won't be Shimano compatible.
    Thanks, but I know that. No, I ordered a set of Attack shifters w/ the derailleur.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,624

    Unlucky and lucky

    I think you were just very unlucky. Small innocent looking sticks can do loads of damage to wheels, mechs, hangers, whatever! You were just unlucky it happened on a new mech that's all.

    One thing I would say about the X9 mech, compared to Shimano, is that the arm is solidly mounted to the hanger and does not float on its mount like the Shimano ones. This means that in certain load cases it will be more prone to snapping off like this. However, to counter this, the Shimano mechs are more prone to wrapping themselves around the wheel.

    Let's face it rear mechs are a vulnerable component and you have been genuinely very lucky not to break any in such a long time. It was about time you had a mech breakage!!

  37. #37
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by uktrailmonster
    Let's face it rear mechs are a vulnerable component and you have been genuinely very lucky not to break any in such a long time. It was about time you had a mech breakage!!
    Perhaps. I e-mailed a link to this thread to SRAM USA. Will be interesting to see if anyone there bothers to comment.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vecsus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,812
    If a scientist were to base his entire thesis on a single counter-example, he'd be laughed out of the laboratory. You either got a bum derailleur or a set of really bad circumstances. You cannot possibly say that in an identical situation that a shimano derailleur would have survived. And you cannot possibly say that another X.9 would have failed in those same circumstances. I've seen shimano parts with similar breaks. When you turn out that many parts per year, you are bound to have a few failures.

    I've been riding with X.9 for a year now and absolutely love it. Easier to tune, holds up under muddy conditions much better, and makes less noise than my old shimano stuff. (And yes, I had it all properly tuned.)

  39. #39
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by Vecsus
    If a scientist were to base his entire thesis on a single counter-example, he'd be laughed out of the laboratory. You either got a bum derailleur or a set of really bad circumstances. You cannot possibly say that in an identical situation that a shimano derailleur would have survived. And you cannot possibly say that another X.9 would have failed in those same circumstances. I've seen shimano parts with similar breaks. When you turn out that many parts per year, you are bound to have a few failures.
    I am a scientist, and I'm not sure I follow...Where did I say any of those things? I'm not defending a thesis, and your analogy is somewhat less than relevant. I started the thread in attempt to see if there were, in fact, other examples of X.9s failing in a similar manner (as the review section of this site seems to indicate). The subject of my post was a question, not a wild accusation or hastily drawn conclusion like "SRAM SUCKS!".

    All I've posted was my experience. I made no claims that Shimano was vastly-superior, indestructible, etc., nor have I posted anything derogatory about SRAM. Again, just the sum of my experience. I don't know why people keep reading into this. Would I ever use another SRAM derailleur? Maybe. But I'm certainly in no hurry to rush out and plunk down more cash for one at the moment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vecsus
    I've been riding with X.9 for a year now and absolutely love it. Easier to tune, holds up under muddy conditions much better, and makes less noise than my old shimano stuff. (And yes, I had it all properly tuned.)
    Glad you're happy with it. I was too, for a few weeks. Although 'easier' & 'better' are subjective.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  40. #40
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,997

    Beating on an X-7 ...

    Quote Originally Posted by watermoccasin
    When you get a stick in your derailleur, something breaks. Sometimes it's the derailleur, sometimes it's the hanger. It's just part of mountain biking. Buy a new derailleur and get back on the trails.

    I've actually had a lot better luck with the SRAM derailleurs than Shimanos. Went through about a dozen Shimano derailleurs last year between my trailbike and FR bike, got SRAM last fall and haven't toasted one yet. The Shimanos seem to wear out and get sloppy a lot faster (only a couple actually broke).
    I beat the hell out of an 2000 X-7 derailleur. I tortured in it ALL kinds of ways. And it survived.

    The pic above shows a snapped derailleur hanger. This should not happen. If the hanger goes, the derailleur should stay intact.

    Of course, I think there is a tendency for people to "blame SRAM" when they should be blaming a stick. If someone's Shimano derailleur snaps after a stick, they shrug and buy another Shimano. If a SRAM one snaps, I think people sometimes conclude that it was SRAM as opposed to a hit that would have broken anybody's derailleur.

    I strongly urge the original poster to send his pictures to SRAM and get a replacement.

  41. #41
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by willtsmith_nwi
    The pic above shows a snapped derailleur hanger. This should not happen.
    Fortunately, (or is that unfortunately? ), it doesn't. That black piece is not my derailleur hanger, it's part of the X-9s B-tension mechanism. The black part rests against the tab on the frame, and the B-tension screw pushes against it. The small piece of derailleur in the pics was still bolted to my frame after the derailleur broke.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  42. #42
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,997

    Your behavior ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    I am a scientist, and I'm not sure I follow...Where did I say any of those things? I'm not defending a thesis, and your analogy is somewhat less than relevant. I started the thread in attempt to see if there were, in fact, other examples of X.9s failing in a similar manner (as the review section of this site seems to indicate). The subject of my post was a question, not a wild accusation or hastily drawn conclusion like "SRAM SUCKS!".

    All I've posted was my experience. I made no claims that Shimano was vastly-superior, indestructible, etc., nor have I posted anything derogatory about SRAM. Again, just the sum of my experience. I don't know why people keep reading into this. Would I ever use another SRAM derailleur? Maybe. But I'm certainly in no hurry to rush out and plunk down more cash for one at the moment.



    Glad you're happy with it. I was too, for a few weeks. Although 'easier' & 'better' are subjective.
    Your behavior demonstates a conclusion that you made that SRAM is unreliable. Instead of buying a new X-series derailleur, you chose to spend MORE money switching to a Shimano drivetrain.

    There are people who ride on SRAM derailleurs for years with no failures. And I'm sure there are people who break their Shimano's out of the box. At the very least, it would be prudent to simply by an X-7 derailleur (cheaper) while your X-9 is under warranty review and see if a similar event occurs.

    SRAM didn't rise from a maker of throttle shifters to the #2 manufacturer rivaling SRAM by producing unreliable junk. They don't make their money through OEM contracts on stock bikes. SRAM makes their money by having a dedicated following of people who use their equipment, have been satisfied by it, and upgrade to it.

    SRAM users have a saying. Once you've gone SRAM, you'll never go back. If the SRAM isn't good, SRAM would have gone out of business.

  43. #43
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by willtsmith_nwi
    SRAM users have a saying. Once you've gone SRAM, you'll never go back.
    Are all SRAM users insanely defensive, too? Look, you don't have any idea how much I spent or didn't spend on the "shimano drivetrain" you claim I purchased and, frankly, the money isn't the issue here.

    I bought a shimano derailleur because (as I've stated a dozen times already) I've never had a single problem with them in 15 years. Maybe you've broken 100 of them. Maybe mine will break the day after I get it, but THAT is a risk that I'm willing to take because I have a long history of satisfaction w/ their products. SRAM? Not so much.

    I also bought a new set of SRAM shifters with it, because I happen to like them. I guess you missed that part. *If* I get a replacement for the X.9, then I'll still have the X.9 shifters to go with it. As it stands, it cost $80 to fix my bike and, either way, I'll have shifters for whatever derailleur I chose to run in the future. A new X.9 derailleur is what $69?

    For the extra $11, I'll take the freedom of choice. That is what SRAM is all about anyway, right?

    christ...
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  44. #44
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,997

    So you're saying ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    Fortunately, (or is that unfortunately? ), it doesn't. That black piece is not my derailleur hanger, it's part of the X-9s B-tension mechanism. The black part rests against the tab on the frame, and the B-tension screw pushes against it. The small piece of derailleur in the pics was still bolted to my frame after the derailleur broke.
    Does your frame have a replaceable derailleur hanger???

  45. #45
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,997

    JB Weld

    Quote Originally Posted by azdrawdy
    Here's my JRA X-9 rear derailleur. Unreal. I had always used Shimano before, and went back to them immediately after this "incident".

    Michael
    That derailleur can still be used. Put some JB weld around those threads on a replaceable hanger and you're back in business.

  46. #46
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by willtsmith_nwi
    Does your frame have a replaceable derailleur hanger???
    No. It's a steel hardtail (Cove).
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  47. #47
    willtsmith_nwi
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,997

    Than there is no problem ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    No. It's a steel hardtail (Cove).
    The derailleur performed EXACTLY like it was supposed to. It broke on behalf of your frame.

    Your Shimano derailleur would probably have suffered the same fate. Had it not, you would probably have a bent or damaged frame.

    I've broke three separate derailleur hangers this fall. Net cost ... $30.

  48. #48
    Inbred Homebrewer
    Reputation: Stick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by willtsmith_nwi
    The derailleur performed EXACTLY like it was supposed to. It broke on behalf of your frame.

    Your Shimano derailleur would probably have suffered the same fate. Had it not, you would probably have a bent or damaged frame.

    I've broke three separate derailleur hangers this fall. Net cost ... $30.
    Man, you're all over the place. It broke on behalf of my frame? That's great. Remind me to call SRAM and thank them. Are you high? If anything, they should engineer the focking bolt to break in half, not the derailleur body itself. In fact, it's remarkable that the aluminum mounting bolt didn't break on either of the broken derailleurs presented in this thread.

    As for the derailleur breaking like it was 'supposed to', there's very little chance that my steel hanger would have broken off. It may bend, but that's the beauty of steel. You can bend it back and have it realligned.

    What's the number of hangers you've broken have to do with anything? Sounds like you should be more careful.
    "mmmm....Beeeeeeer." - Homer J. Simpson

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: badlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    293

    I understand this exactly, I would do the same

    Quote Originally Posted by Stick
    Are all SRAM users insanely defensive, too? Look, you don't have any idea how much I spent or didn't spend on the "shimano drivetrain" you claim I purchased and, frankly, the money isn't the issue here.

    I bought a shimano derailleur because (as I've stated a dozen times already) I've never had a single problem with them in 15 years. Maybe you've broken 100 of them. Maybe mine will break the day after I get it, but THAT is a risk that I'm willing to take because I have a long history of satisfaction w/ their products. SRAM? Not so much.

    I also bought a new set of SRAM shifters with it, because I happen to like them. I guess you missed that part. *If* I get a replacement for the X.9, then I'll still have the X.9 shifters to go with it. As it stands, it cost $80 to fix my bike and, either way, I'll have shifters for whatever derailleur I chose to run in the future. A new X.9 derailleur is what $69?

    For the extra $11, I'll take the freedom of choice. That is what SRAM is all about anyway, right?

    christ...
    When I get bad results out of a product, and all I want to do is ride, I am not one to wait around for things to happen. And I will go with what has been reliable for me. I have sram and I am not defensive. An $80 throwdown is less than my coffee bill for 2 months (probably a month - I don't want to know - and you know what happens to the coffee). I like to ride.

    Rick

  50. #50
    SALLGUD
    Reputation: azdrawdy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    449
    Quote Originally Posted by uktrailmonster
    I think you were just very unlucky. Small innocent looking sticks can do loads of damage to wheels, mechs, hangers, whatever! You were just unlucky it happened on a new mech that's all.

    One thing I would say about the X9 mech, compared to Shimano, is that the arm is solidly mounted to the hanger and does not float on its mount like the Shimano ones. This means that in certain load cases it will be more prone to snapping off like this. However, to counter this, the Shimano mechs are more prone to wrapping themselves around the wheel.

    Let's face it rear mechs are a vulnerable component and you have been genuinely very lucky not to break any in such a long time. It was about time you had a mech breakage!!
    The arm does not float? If anything, it feels as though the SRAM derailleur is not securely attached to the hanger. Numerous posts have been on the SRAM board in relationship to the loose and wobbly feeling after securing the read derailleur to the hanger. My XTR is mounted very solidly to my 575, as is the XT on my Burner. The X-9 was the loose-feeling, wobbly one, but it has been stated numerous times that the looseness is "normal".

    As far as my derailleur snapping, a limb or stick played no part in its failure. I have read too many posts about SRAM derailleurs snapping, quite often due to tiny sticks, quite often just JRA. As we all do, draw your own conclusions. I already have with my wallet.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Mountain Bike Spring Rate Calculator V5.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-16-2013, 08:46 PM
  2. Mountain Bike Spring Rate Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 06:34 PM
  3. Mountain Bike Gear Ratio Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 10:57 AM
  4. Mountain Bike Spring Rate Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Canadian Bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 10:28 AM
  5. Mountain Bike Gear Ratio Calculator V4.0
    By FireDog46 in forum Canadian Bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-29-2004, 10:27 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •