Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 465
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,115
    Quote Originally Posted by indyfab25 View Post
    Ever see the mega range cassette?

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 4
    I just dont see it for this market.

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    It's more likely this is something that' been cobbled together from aftermarket bits than something official from Shimano. FWIW, there was talk and pics not long ago though about a not-many-speed Shimano DH prototype cassette that had bigger gaps between the gears so it was possible to make a large change in ratio rapidly.

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,346
    That cassette looks like a half-measure and Shimano doesn't do half-measures.

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726
    That, a simple 11 to max 44 10 speed cassette that works with existing shifter/derailleur and wheel plus allows for customizing the highest gears by switching cogs, would be fantastic.

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    Probably won't be that ^^^. It'll be 11 speed and require new wheels just like the road.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    ^ Whatever Shimano do, they'll tell us it requires new parts (even if it doesn't), so the only way to figure things out for sure will to be to experiment - as usual. BTW, there's no real reason that 11 speed MTB would need a wider freehub body as the extra (large) cog could just be cantilevered out over the spokes, and use 10 speed spacing; seeing some people are having troubles with some existing freehub bodies with 36T cogs, I'd say a *stronger* freehub body is more likely to be required. Since this would need different construction - as there's no way to make more room for larger, stronger parts without a redesign - Shimano could end up doing just about anything.

    The only way we'll have any idea what Shimano are going to do will be to wait and see, but my guess is that whatever it is won't have a low enough bottom gear, i.e., business as usual. :-(

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pulser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,820
    All I want is an 11x40 cassette that works with existing hubs. I will even buy a new 11sp shifter and rd if I have to. But cassettes have to be priced no more then $150 and have to work with the wheels I have.

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    Should be easy to make, but whether they'll do it is another matter...

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by pulser View Post
    All I want is an 11x40 cassette that works with existing hubs. I will even buy a new 11sp shifter and rd if I have to. But cassettes have to be priced no more then $150 and have to work with the wheels I have.
    It can be done, Recon has come up with a 11-40 10 speed. Costly at 250 Euro or so, materials are steel/titanium plus aluminum for the last 3 cogs, 320 grams. Spacing, 11, 13, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 32, 36, 40 is a bit silly, it looks like the cogs are all individual (no spider), but ... it is an (expensive) option.
    Recon MTB Titan Kassetten/Cassette 10s 11-40 Shimano compatible, 249,

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    ^ It actually says: "The sprockets are all individually. The 3 largest on a Spyder, then the two next largest again on a Spyder. " A bit contradictory, but their English is still better than my German!

    Cog sizes are weird though, so I'd guess it's mostly cobbled together from bits they already made for other cassettes. Even percent steps, or increasing as the gears get lower would make a lot more sense, and 27-32T = WTF. The SRAM/General Lee 11,13,15,17,19,22,25,29,34,40 combo looks much better and is way cheaper too.

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    35
    Here it is-
    Jared graves was using it at whislter.

    Pinkbike had an article on this that lasted 2-3 hours before shimano had it pulled. Behold it while you can-
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-42cassette.jpg  


  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    574

    Re: Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Yup, that was posted on the prevuous page. Hope we'd hear something about it soon.

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pulser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,820
    So nothing at Eurobike? I wonder how long we will have to wonder if its going to go public.

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bedell99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,250

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Spoke with Shimano rep and its coming. He just wouldn't tell me when but said soon. Real soon and it will be compatible with existing components.

    Erik

  15. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pulser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,820
    Quote Originally Posted by bedell99 View Post
    Spoke with Shimano rep and its coming. He just wouldn't tell me when but said soon. Real soon and it will be compatible with existing components.

    Erik
    I hope your right. My contact told me when pigs fly they are working on something I can't talk about.

  16. #116
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,971
    Xtr is on closeout at the distributors. The cranks are being discontinued, as are the brakes. That is telling.

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 4
    I am immune to your disdain.

  17. #117
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,062
    Can you run a 28 t narrow wide on any of The XTR cranks? Might have to pick some up if so.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bedell99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,250

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    If I was a gambling man XTR got moved up in the redesign calendar due to XX1. If you look at Shimano's normal update it happens every 4 years which put you at a release in the summer of 2014.

    I bet Shimano has something up there sleeve and I hope to see it at Interbike. If not we are bound to see something next summer.

    I would like to see a 12 speed that fits in 11 speed hubs with ratios of 11-13-15-17-19-21-24-27-30-34-38-42. Closer gaps and 11 and all major wheel manufactures are making 11 speed hubs.

    Erik

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madskatingcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by indyfab25 View Post
    Xtr is on closeout at the distributors. The cranks are being discontinued, as are the brakes. That is telling.
    Regarding the brakes, only the BR-M985 race brakes are discontinued and replaced by the XTR BR-M987. The trail version is being continued with updated i-spec type b compatible mounting clamps.

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,346
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    Can you run a 28 t narrow wide on any of The XTR cranks? Might have to pick some up if so.
    I really don't think so. The best you could do is one of the 30T Raceface rings. The racing double uses an 88mm bolt circle which would fit a 28T, but I don't think anybody makes one for that pattern.

  21. #121
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,971

    Re: Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by madskatingcow View Post
    Regarding the brakes, only the BR-M985 race brakes are discontinued and replaced by the XTR BR-M987. The trail version is being continued with updated i-spec type b compatible mounting clamps.
    Ahh, so the trails are discontinued due to the new mounting. Got it. Cool. Lots of updates.

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 4
    I am immune to your disdain.

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bedell99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,250

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    What is the type B IPSec?

    Erik

  23. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,529
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    Can you run a 28 t narrow wide on any of The XTR cranks? Might have to pick some up if so.
    You could run it if the XTR BCD matches the chainring, which the RFs are 104BCD. With rings that smaller than 30T, there's interference with the spider arms so the chain won't fit.

    Note: I've not tried this conversion. You'd need to place spacers/washers between the ring and crank to clear the spider arms. 2mm might be enough to clear. You might also need longer chainring bolts depending on how long your existing bolts are. You'd want to be sure you've got plenty of thread holding too with all force on the rings while pedaling.

    The other thing is to make sure the chain clears the spider arms when shifting down the cassette to the smaller cogs. In the smaller cogs, the chain will be now outboard of the spider and may contact the spider arms.

    I'm curious to see if it could work. Please post back if you do this.
    We Ride In God's Country!

  24. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by bedell99 View Post
    What is the type B IPSec?

    Erik
    I love Shimano, but it's a cluster F.... they should have left alone. They changed the ISpec mounting, so the original ISpec is called A and the new one is B. They are not completely backwards compatible either. I don't remember which combo works. It was something like B brake lever can work with both A and B shifters, but A lever won't with B shifter. Anyway as I said really stupid on Shimanos part.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  25. #125
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,971

    Re: Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    I love Shimano, but it's a cluster F.... they should have left alone. They changed the ISpec mounting, so the original ISpec is called A and the new one is B. They are not completely backwards compatible either. I don't remember which combo work. It was something like B brake lever can works with both A and B shifters, but A lever won't with B shifter. Anyway as I said really stupid on Shimanos part.
    Ugh

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 4
    I am immune to your disdain.

  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by bedell99 View Post
    I would like to see a 12 speed that fits in 11 speed hubs with ratios of 11-13-15-17-19-21-24-27-30-34-38-42. Closer gaps and 11 and all major wheel manufactures are making 11 speed hubs.
    My Gods! 10 speed is plenty: 11-13-15-18-21-24-28-32-37-42
    11 speed might make sense if the biggest cog goes to 44

  27. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    Re I-speck: According to my official Shimano blurb, the new shifter fits directly to the new brake lever but requires a "special nut" to attach to the old brake lever. The old shifter supposedly won't fit the new brake lever at all. It'd be kinda nice if Shimano would quit with the "one step forward, two steps back" stuff...

    Quote Originally Posted by Davide View Post
    11 speed might make sense if the biggest cog goes to 44
    No, no no! 11 is better - just ask Nigel Tufnel. And then there's Twelve: http://www.discogs.com/Various-Tripl...elease/1010722

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madskatingcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by satanas View Post
    ^ According to my Shimano blurb, the new shifter fits directly to the new brake lever but requires a "special nut" to attach to the old brake lever. The old shifter won't officially fit the new brake lever at all. It'd be kinda nice if Shimano would quit with the "one step forward, two steps back" stuff...
    In the box of the new i-spec type B shifters there is an additional nut included to mount to the old brake levers.

    The old i-spec type A shifters only work with the old brake levers.

    I've had the old type A, and currently own two type B setups (2014 XT brakes / shifters, 2014 XTR trail brakes / shifters) : the new type B is a really good design and an improvement over the old type A. Definitely not 'one step forward, two steps back'.

  29. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    Still, making things incompatible doesn't help. Shimano also have a habit of doing things like for instance offering a larger cassette (34 -> 36T) and at the same time making the smallest chainring larger (22 -> 24T). They make some great stuff, but it'd be nice if they only changed things when there was a reason for doing so that didn't include either marketing or planned obsolescence.

    It's an absolute nightmare trying to keep up with what's compatible with what, and things are getting worse, especially since 1) the info is generally not available online from Shimano, and 2) the printed material is becoming ever-scarcer every year. Of course, one can attempt to ask the Shimano reps but I get the impression they have to do a lot of guessing themselves.

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by madskatingcow View Post
    In the box of the new i-spec type B shifters there is an additional nut included to mount to the old brake levers.

    The old i-spec type A shifters only work with the old brake levers.

    I've had the old type A, and currently own two type B setups (2014 XT brakes / shifters, 2014 XTR trail brakes / shifters) : the new type B is a really good design and an improvement over the old type A. Definitely not 'one step forward, two steps back'.
    Based on what I saw, it looks like you still can't adjust the angle between the brake lever and shifters like the matchmakers, so how much better can this mounting be? What problem did it solve, we know it created problems.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madskatingcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    No, you can't adjust the angle - but for me it's perfect out of the box.

  32. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by madskatingcow View Post
    No, you can't adjust the angle - but for me it's perfect out of the box.
    Ok so what's the improvement? That's my point, why change it if you've added nothing?

    Well they did add something, incompatibility with the older version.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,346
    It's not like you have to get i-spec anyway. If you want it, fine, if not, compatibility is not your worry.

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by epic View Post
    It's not like you have to get i-spec anyway. If you want it, fine, if not, compatibility is not your worry.
    Love that answer, well no biggie as long as you don't want ISpec. If you do,5 well screw you. You know how many lower end build kits spec Shimano shifters but Avid brakes?
    So if you bought one of those recently Shimano just gave you the middle finger if you want to upgrade brakes.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  35. #135
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,971

    Re: Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    Love that answer, well no biggie as long as you don't want ISpec. If you do,5 well screw you. You know how many lower end build kits spec Shimano shifters but Avid brakes?
    So if you bought one of those recently Shimano just gave you the middle finger if you want to upgrade brakes.
    Not really, just get compatible brakes. There plenty out there and will be cheaper to boot. Kinda did you a favor. It is not necessary anyway...so whatever.

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 4
    I am immune to your disdain.

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,346
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    Love that answer, well no biggie as long as you don't want ISpec. If you do,5 well screw you. You know how many lower end build kits spec Shimano shifters but Avid brakes?
    So if you bought one of those recently Shimano just gave you the middle finger if you want to upgrade brakes.
    I don't understand what you are saying. Shimano makes shiftlevers with and without i-spec. I can't imagine how this is a middle finger. You can also buy the i-spec mounts and convert non-ispec shifters if you want to.

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madskatingcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    Ok so what's the improvement? That's my point, why change it if you've added nothing?
    1. The interface between brakes and shifters is more solid.
    2. No need to dismount the brake lever clamp in case you wish to mount the shifters to the clamp (although in general you only need to do this once).

    If you look at it in real life, it's a really clever system and makes you wonder nobody else thought about it.

  38. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    826

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by madskatingcow View Post
    1. The interface between brakes and shifters is more solid.
    2. No need to dismount the brake lever clamp in case you wish to mount the shifters to the clamp (although in general you only need to do this once).

    If you look at it in real life, it's a really clever system and makes you wonder nobody else thought about it.
    Sounds like you've had a look at both A spec and B spec... Any ideas if pairing B spec shifters with A spec levers result in the more solid interface that you mention with a B spec/B spec setup? Or do you think that the new brake lever design is integral to the sturdier setup?

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madskatingcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    The biggest difference is on the inside of the lever clamp : there is no longer a 'channel' to hold the T-nut for tightening the shifter's mounting bolt.

    Have a look at the tech documents of the shifters to see the difference between the shifter interface (note : you can see the T-nut for mounting the type B shifters to older brakes) :

    i-spec type a

    i-spec type b
    Last edited by madskatingcow; 09-16-2013 at 06:48 AM.

  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    979

    Re: Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Back to main topic...damn inter bike is half over and still no dedicated 1x group/setup from shimano... dang.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

  41. #141
    www.EpicCyclist.com
    Reputation: team_wee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    245
    WTF! I find it strange, are they sleeping??? I guess I'm going Sram if they don't get their $h!t together soon.

  42. #142
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,971
    I knew he was lying...

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 4
    I am immune to your disdain.

  43. #143
    Mtc
    Mtc is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mtc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    524
    In my experience the SRAM stuff is going to be single season use. Creaky cassettes, fast wearing drivetrain. Gives Shimano a little time to figure it out. Shimanos big argument is limited gear range with big gaps in between. I've been on the SRAM for 6 month, hated the gearing at first but have gotten use to it. Rode a 2x10 last weekend and it seemed...complicated! The front shifter really got in the way of my dropper remote
    I keep telling my Shimano rep I know they have a patent for a 14 speed cassette and chain, just sayin.

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madskatingcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    Shimano's stuff is in general properly engineered and shouldn't be giving too much of a hassle.

    Sold al my X.0 and XX stuff, the creaking of the Type 2 rear derailleur drove me nuts. Same as their crappy brakes.

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bedell99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,250
    I though maybe they would release something at Intervbike but the reality is 2014 XTR is coming in the spring and it makes sense they release it then.

    Erik

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madskatingcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by bedell99 View Post
    I though maybe they would release something at Intervbike but the reality is 2014 XTR is coming in the spring and it makes sense they release it then.

    Erik
    Except for the 2014 XTR Race brakes, wheels, chain, bottom brackets, etc ...

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    135
    so no update at all from shimano?

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    446
    It seems to me that Shimano simply doesn't have an answer to Sram's 1x11. I'm a loyal Shimano guy. Have been for years. Strayed to the XO dark side once and regretted it.

    But it seems to me the great Japanese giant is sleeping. No 12x142 hubs (except the 32hole boat anchors I currently have), no 1x11, and their only carbon mountain bike wheels are tubular???

    Maybe the Tsunami set their country back a year I don't know...

  49. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    2
    As they say...... Patience is a virtue...........

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    826
    If shimano are crafty, their answer to sram's 1x11 would be a 1x12 system. Then they wouldn't have to answer to anybody until sram brings 1x13 to market. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to forecast what the next trend in drivetrains will be

  51. #151
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,062
    The next trend in geared drivetrains, hopefully, doesn't include any sort of derailleur.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  52. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,806
    I don't mind derailleurs. If it has batteries and servo motors though, I'm going all single speed.

  53. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,724
    Quote Originally Posted by incubus View Post
    If shimano are crafty, their answer to sram's 1x11 would be a 1x12 system. Then they wouldn't have to answer to anybody until sram brings 1x13 to market. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to forecast what the next trend in drivetrains will be
    It doesn't take a rocket scientist, but it does take a good engineer. It seems like there should be a better design than a derailleur moving a chain across a bunch of cogs, especially for mtb. Derailleurs get broken, need regular adjustment, they freeze up in the winter, get snagged on branches and bashed on rocks. We need an internally geared hub that is reliable, shifts well under load, and isn't heavy. Maybe combined with belt drive to minimize any maintenance required.

  54. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    956
    I'm not even interested in 11 speeds, I just want wider range.

    I was wondering if we might someday see finer chain pitch. That would help mitigate uneven jumps between gears. For example, if you doubled the chain pitch (not claiming that's a good idea), your 11-36 could become an equivalent 22-72. Now you can make <5% changes on the top end instead of ~9%.

  55. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by spsoon View Post
    I'm not even interested in 11 speeds, I just want wider range.

    I was wondering if we might someday see finer chain pitch. That would help mitigate uneven jumps between gears. For example, if you doubled the chain pitch (not claiming that's a good idea), your 11-36 could become an equivalent 22-72. Now you can make <5% changes on the top end instead of ~9%.
    I brought up exactly the same thing earlier in this thread and few people seemed to get it. I still like the idea, not of doubling it but of reducing it by 20% or so. I don't believe in 9 or 10 tooth cogs, but I would like to see an 11-tooth with a 20% smaller diameter, to add range that way. Keep the diameter of everything else about the same (just with about 20% more teeth). Better range, better ratios because your gear changes would be more uniform from one to the next. Poorer chain retention, but haven't we improved that significantly? I haven't dropped a chain from anything other than front shifting ever since getting Shadow+.

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,053

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by Mutantclover View Post
    I brought up exactly the same thing earlier in this thread and few people seemed to get it. I still like the idea, not of doubling it but of reducing it by 20% or so. I don't believe in 9 or 10 tooth cogs, but I would like to see an 11-tooth with a 20% smaller diameter, to add range that way. Keep the diameter of everything else about the same (just with about 20% more teeth). Better range, better ratios because your gear changes would be more uniform from one to the next. Poorer chain retention, but haven't we improved that significantly? I haven't dropped a chain from anything other than front shifting ever since getting Shadow+.
    So you want a whole new standard on chains, rings, cassettes and derailleur pullies?

  57. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    956
    That's pretty much was happens as they add cogs anyway.

  58. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    ^ No it is not. Shimano, SRAM and Campagnolo always claim that only the new bits will work together, but in reality some older stuff can often be mixed in. Since there are lots of potential combinations it is simpler to make a blanket statement that one must use only XXTR 13 speed than it is to say anything else, and if one follows directions then things should normally work. This does not mean no other combinations will work, but rather that one needs to understand how things work before considering making substitutions. As most people do not understand how things work, don't want to think about it, and might take legal action if annoyed, manufacturers' policy here is entirely understandable.

    Also, the problem with making cogs smaller in diameter will be cassette bodies and hub bearings - these have to fit somewhere and smaller diameter cogs mean less space is available. If one was going to change chain pitch it would in fact be more sensible mechanically to use cogs with *MORE* teeth and to use existing or larger diameter cassette bodies. Advantages here would be less load on the cassette teeth and chain, plus larger bearings and the possibility of closer ratios. 11T is already pushing it, and a mechanical engineering text I have suggests a minimum of 16T for power transmission. In any case, Shimano tried 10mm pitch in the 1970s and this was rejected by the market.

  59. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brentos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,614
    Shave 600 grams off an Alfine Di2 hub, develop a clever chain tensioning system, and Shimano trumps XX1...

  60. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation: juan_speeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,305
    Quote Originally Posted by brentos View Post
    Shave 600 grams off an Alfine Di2 hub, develop a clever chain tensioning system, and Shimano trumps XX1...
    Except in efficiency. A roller chain and multiple cogs will always transmit more power than planetary gears.
    Supply Side Jesusnomisist

  61. #161
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,062
    Quote Originally Posted by juan_speeder View Post
    Except in efficiency. A roller chain and multiple cogs will always transmit more power than planetary gears.
    Until the technology develops to where it doesn't. or is overcome by other factors.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  62. #162
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,178
    If you have an internally geared hub/gearbox, it really should be in the frame, not the rear hub. This would fairly radically change bicycle design, maybe having a "standard" place and setup for the gears above the cranks, but it would allow many things, the ability to "protect" the cables and some of the chain from the environments, allow for significantly less unsprung weight (as opposed to things like inverted forks that are not significant at all), better designed-symmetrical wheels, etc.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  63. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    834

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Several years ago I thought we'd all be on gearbox bikes by now.

    With the introduction of SRAMs 1x11, I don't see us riding gearbox bike for the next several years....

    And If I'm honest with myself I've damages 2 derailuers in the last several so maybe it's not so bad.....especially with a potential gearbox bike weighing more than the "system" added together!

    Not unless a new manufacturing process or special light weight durable metal is found to make a gearbox.

    Unfortunately SRAM for the win and their backwards innovation of 1x

  64. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    If you have an internally geared hub/gearbox, it really should be in the frame, not the rear hub. This would fairly radically change bicycle design, maybe having a "standard" place and setup for the gears above the cranks, but it would allow many things, the ability to "protect" the cables and some of the chain from the environments, allow for significantly less unsprung weight (as opposed to things like inverted forks that are not significant at all), better designed-symmetrical wheels, etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gripo View Post
    Several years ago I thought we'd all be on gearbox bikes by now.

    With the introduction of SRAMs 1x11, I don't see us riding gearbox bike for the next several years....

    And If I'm honest with myself I've damages 2 derailuers in the last several so maybe it's not so bad.....especially with a potential gearbox bike weighing more than the "system" added together!

    Not unless a new manufacturing process or special light weight durable metal is found to make a gearbox.

    Unfortunately SRAM for the win and their backwards innovation of 1x


    PINION / P1.18 / DRIVE TECHNOLOGY
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  65. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    ^ Very interesting as long as one doesn't mind that a special frame is required, the cost is extremely high, that limited crank lengths are available (i.e., no 172.5mm, etc), or that the Q factor is 174mm. Given all these factors, for me Rohloff still comes out ahead.

    It will be interesting to see what Shimano come up with by this time next year though - I suspect we're due for a new XTR groupset, and who knows what else.

  66. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2
    Dear shimano, this is the 10-speed cassette with range 11-40t (11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30-34 + 40 alu cog).
    It is the same as my current XT 9spd 11-34 cassette with 40t sprocket. And this is everything what an average "1x user" want. Wide range, long life, low weight, classic freehub, 10spd compatibility and cheap option.
    You can make a 12 speed Di2 XTR group, but for us, mortal bikers is 11-40t 10spd cassette absolutely suffcient.
    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-2013-10-18-676.jpg

  67. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation: plume's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,654
    Shimano believes in the front derailleur, sadly. I doubt we'll ever see a proper 1X11 groupo from them. If they really drop a Di2 mountain group I might cry - this is not what mountain bikers want. We want a stable wide range 1X system. I just don't think Shimano will ever produce this. I think Shimano's thought is that Sram could never make a FD actually work, so that's why they went the direction of simply removing it - that's a pretty ego driven thing to say/think but there's some truth to it. On the flip it turns out that XX1 is really really close to what we all wanted all along. Gear boxes are still 7 years out I think...
    My one says BRAP!

  68. #168
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,352
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    If you have an internally geared hub/gearbox, it really should be in the frame, not the rear hub. This would fairly radically change bicycle design, maybe having a "standard" place and setup for the gears above the cranks, but it would allow many things, the ability to "protect" the cables and some of the chain from the environments, allow for significantly less unsprung weight (as opposed to things like inverted forks that are not significant at all), better designed-symmetrical wheels, etc.
    Lahar...


  69. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    135
    Zerode too

  70. #170
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,178
    Well, lots really, from ones intended to use internally geared hubs in the frame to gearboxes in the frame. The internally geared hub is nice because you can take it in and out as one unit, but there are other valid ways to do it. There have been lots of DH bikes, and a few hardtails that have done this.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  71. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation: juan_speeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,305
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Lahar...



    Ewwwwww!
    Supply Side Jesusnomisist

  72. #172
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,062
    Quote Originally Posted by juan_speeder View Post
    Ewwwwww!
    It's a Trimble with warts n' tumors n' sh1t all over it.
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  73. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    It's a Trimble with warts n' tumors n' sh1t all over it.
    Trimble: there's a name ( in MTB ) that I haven't heard in a dog's age. Ah, memories...

  74. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation: NZPeterG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by Gripo View Post
    Several years ago I thought we'd all be on gearbox bikes by now.

    With the introduction of SRAMs 1x11, I don't see us riding gearbox bike for the next several years....

    And If I'm honest with myself I've damages 2 derailuers in the last several so maybe it's not so bad.....especially with a potential gearbox bike weighing more than the "system" added together!

    Not unless a new manufacturing process or special light weight durable metal is found to make a gearbox.

    Unfortunately SRAM for the win and their backwards innovation of 1x
    1st off I have been using a Rohloff Speedhub for over 9 years and love it for riding in Mud and for cycle touring! But the one thing that is going to stop Hub Gear's and Gearbox Mountain Bike's is that STD axle size's and cranks are changing so fast that know one will make a Gear Hub, Gearbox to fit all set up's.
    I did ask one of the head designer's from Sram about this and the reply was No way at this time! Sad but i'm looking forward to my new MTB with XO1 on it..


    Pete...

  75. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    It's a Trimble with warts n' tumors n' sh1t all over it.
    indeed; and i love(d) them both. the trimble is long since dead; hanging wall art now, but the lahar is still running strong after 7 seasons. brilliant bike. the drivetrain has been flawless with next to no maintenance (apart from lubing chains). gearboxes rock. hopefully one day we'll see a viable trailbike from someone (zerode??).

  76. #176
    The Fastest of Bananas
    Reputation: FastBanana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,611
    I have been a advocate of 1x(9-10-whatever) for a long time. However, after moving to steeper terrain, and then trying a 2x10, I am kinda sold on the front shifting again.

    The rear excels at giving your legs the cadence they want. However, I find myself loving being able to dump or gain a bunch of gears at once on the front side, when I hit an unexpected up or downhill, where I dont have many pedal rotations to get all set.

    I think, that is why Shimano is sticking to their guns on front shifting. I agree with it.

    However, on the East Coast, or more mild terrian in general, 1x's work great because you can anticipate terrain changes better, and have less need for a very low gear.

    BLUF: Going back to double fronts and 9 speed rear.

  77. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    153
    I feel exactly the opposite when riding steep technical terrain. I live in BC and when riding down a steep section followed by a steep uphill, I'd rather be able to get into my easiest gear with just one thumb motion on my right hand, so my left can get my seatpost back up to climbing height.

    I've been riding with a 30tooth narrow-wide chainring from Raceface and a General Lee 40 tooth cassette with shimano shifters. Works great. Absolutely silent. Never had a dropped chain. Much simpler and now my dropper post can go under the bar on the left where your thumb can activate it without putting your thumb in a vulnerable position as it is when you run the dropper post on the top of the bar.

    I'm running this setup now on my everything bike, but will likely run this way as well on my XC race bike at the start of next season, until I find out what Shimano's got up their sleeve. I cannot imagine that they haven't got some form of single ring system to release either spring or mid-summer. I'll never buy a bike with a front derailleur again. I'm sure in 2 years all the XT or higher level bikes won't have front derailleurs.

  78. #178
    The Fastest of Bananas
    Reputation: FastBanana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,611
    I disagree that a single front allows you to get in climb mode quickly. It takes me two full pushes to get on the low end of the cassette. (unless grip shift?)

    I can get there in half the time with the front.

    However, if it works for you with the dropper post, that makes a lot of sense.

  79. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by FastBanana View Post
    I have been a advocate of 1x(9-10-whatever) for a long time. However, after moving to steeper terrain, and then trying a 2x10, I am kinda sold on the front shifting again.
    I think the low front gear is needed only on steep looong mountain uphills that takes more than an hour.
    There are budget shimano 1x10 riders with 30t/32t front, 11-42t rear setup who have kept the 24t front ring.
    They shift by hand or by foot on those long uphills.

    If anyone says 2x is better tnan 1x that's FINE but it is because he doesn't ride enough mud (blocked front shifting, chain suck and so on) or his bike is light enough (so 1lb saving doesn't matter much) or is too relaxed (so shifting with both hands is a good exercise and chain noise -without X-Sync- is pleasant)

  80. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    Quote Originally Posted by Sweetness View Post
    I'm sure in 2 years all the XT or higher level bikes won't have front derailleurs.
    Not a chance IMO, but we'll see...

    Quote Originally Posted by FastBanana View Post
    I disagree that a single front allows you to get in climb mode quickly. It takes me two full pushes to get on the low end of the cassette. (unless grip shift?)
    Grip Shift is excellent, but the reports about breakages with XX1 have been a bit worrying.

    By this time next year we should all know what Shimano are doing for the next few years, as I expect a new XTR group will have surfaced. My guess is that XTR will not offer triple chainwheels ever again, and I wouldn't be surprised to see 11 speed at the rear and/or the option of 1x at the front along with 2x. Really though I'm only guessing, like everyone else at this point. :-)

  81. #181
    The Fastest of Bananas
    Reputation: FastBanana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,611
    I didn't say 2x is better than 1x. Its just different. Out here, I don't deal with mud, my bike is 23 pounds geared and fully suspended. 1 more pound in the center of the frame won't make or break me. However, I am not strong enough to climb for 1500 feet in 32-34, so I need something a little lower. (And I'm not buying a $250 general lee).

    I'm mud 1x makes complete sense. Once someone makes a reliable, production, cheap 11-40 10 speed cassette, ill get on board. 9 speed will work for now.

    Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

  82. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    781
    Quote Originally Posted by FastBanana View Post
    I didn't say 2x is better than 1x.
    Sorry, I didn't think that's what you'd meant; I agree all with your comments!

  83. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by satanas View Post
    Not a chance IMO, but we'll see...



    Grip Shift is excellent, but the reports about breakages with XX1 have been a bit worrying.

    By this time next year we should all know what Shimano are doing for the next few years, as I expect a new XTR group will have surfaced. My guess is that XTR will not offer triple chainwheels ever again, and I wouldn't be surprised to see 11 speed at the rear and/or the option of 1x at the front along with 2x. Really though I'm only guessing, like everyone else at this point. :-)
    I hope they don't get rid of triples, because the gearing on Shimano's doubles doesn't make much sense for 29ers. A 38t ring on a 29er is like a 42t ring on a 26"-wheeled bike. No thanks! I have been using a "triple" with the big ring taken off ever since going to a 29er and it works almost perfectly. Every once in awhile on road stretches I have to spin just a little faster than optimum. NBD. At least I don't slam my ring on every boulder, log etc.

  84. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by Mutantclover View Post
    I hope they don't get rid of triples, because the gearing on Shimano's doubles doesn't make much sense for 29ers. A 38t ring on a 29er is like a 42t ring on a 26"-wheeled bike. No thanks! I have been using a "triple" with the big ring taken off ever since going to a 29er and it works almost perfectly. Every once in awhile on road stretches I have to spin just a little faster than optimum. NBD. At least I don't slam my ring on every boulder, log etc.
    I played with the gearing calculator before settling on an XT triple for my 29er--when they can be had for just under $150, it's not too bad forgoing the latest and greatest 1X11 stuff.

  85. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    375

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Bummer I love Shimano, but no rumors or hints! I went out today & bought X01. I wonder how many people Shimano is losing? When I look at the magazines & racing, there sure are a lot of racers using XX1.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  86. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by GSPChilliwack View Post
    I played with the gearing calculator before settling on an XT triple for my 29er--when they can be had for just under $150, it's not too bad forgoing the latest and greatest 1X11 stuff.
    Yeah - the XT group is a steal. I can't believe you can get that level of engineering for so little. The XT hollowcrank is a piece of engineering art, I have it on all my bikes.

    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    Bummer I love Shimano, but no rumors or hints! I went out today & bought X01. I wonder how many people Shimano is losing? When I look at the magazines & racing, there sure are a lot of racers using XX1.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    I think shimano will have to make a 1x10 or 1x11 drive system. They simply have to, the demand it there. It would be suicide not to.

    That being said 1x11 is going through a bit of a hype phase right now. It is really good but with time more people will realize that it's not a universal magic bullet that works for everybody either.

    If you do a lot of long climbs followed by long fast decents it's hard to get around having at least two front chainrings. Well - you could but you'd need something like a +50 tooth sprocket at the rear and a massive rear derailleur. The stepping between gears wouldn't be the best either.

  87. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,866
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    Bummer I love Shimano, but no rumors or hints! I went out today & bought X01. I wonder how many people Shimano is losing? When I look at the magazines & racing, there sure are a lot of racers using XX1.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    I guess it depends. Having had Sram on my Specialized, I'm in no hurry to ever run their stuff again. I can wait.
    OG Ripley v2
    Carver 420 TI

  88. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoEars View Post

    That being said 1x11 is going through a bit of a hype phase right now. It is really good but with time more people will realize that it's not a universal magic bullet that works for everybody either.

    If you do a lot of long climbs followed by long fast decents it's hard to get around having at least two front chainrings. Well - you could but you'd need something like a +50 tooth sprocket at the rear and a massive rear derailleur. The stepping between gears wouldn't be the best either.
    I've got to respectively disagree with you on this one. Everything is a compromise, so one system can never be a magic bullet. Take for example with 2x10 or 3x10, if you ride really aggressive on rough terrain, the chain will most likely fall off & get much worse as the system wears.

    But it is the magic bullet for people who have been running 1x9 or 1x10 or people on the fence of 1x whatever. I've been running 1x9 & 1x10 for the last 3years & to me this is the magic bullet. I run 32front & 10-42rear. It has all the low gearing I could ever want, with plenty of top speed. The only place I've ever felt I needed more top end was a dirt road down hill or pavement, both places I try to avoid at all cost. I've pedaled my 1x10 all over some of the highest parts of Lake Tahoe, yes it was tough, but doable & with 1x11 it will be much easier! I honestly can't recall the last time anyone pulled away from me on the down hill, because I didn't have enough top end.

    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    I guess it depends. Having had Sram on my Specialized, I'm in no hurry to ever run their stuff again. I can wait.
    I had Sram XO on my 2nd bike & I can't wait to put my XTR with a clutched derailleur that I took off my main bike on to it. I never felt like the Sram XO shifted that well. My brother bought XX1 & I spent a week riding his bike. That's what sold me on X01. This is the quietest drive train out there period, it's almost eerie, because you're not use to that silence! The shifts are much improved & faster over their older stuff.

  89. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbbiker View Post
    I've got to respectively disagree with you on this one. Everything is a compromise, so one system can never be a magic bullet.
    I think you misunderstand me, that's exactly my point as well. No system is a magic bullet, everything is a compromise. 1x10 or 1x11 is a fantastic system, I'm absolutely not arguing that.

  90. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    289
    What are you using to get 10-42? Is that with a Shimano 10sp? I'd love a 10-40 or 10-42 10speed setup from Shimano. Making it work with existing hubs and shifters would be huge.

  91. #191
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by jselwyn View Post
    What are you using to get 10-42? Is that with a Shimano 10sp? I'd love a 10-40 or 10-42 10speed setup from Shimano. Making it work with existing hubs and shifters would be huge.
    On some friends bikes & have fitted the X01 cassette on there wheel ( there wheels could take a XD driver ) & just fitted it to there 10 speed setup ( it was sram but it should still work with a shimano ) & just used the 1st 10 geaes ( 42-11 )

    Last week I got a couple of X01 cassette's off CRC for $264 US each, Delivered

    So still not cheap, But a good option all the same.

    Note: They needed a new chain anyway so put an XX1 chain on there 10 speed setup.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  92. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation: juan_speeder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,305
    Quote Originally Posted by muzzanic View Post
    on some friends bikes & have fitted the x01 cassette on there wheel ( there wheels could take a xd driver ) & just fitted it to there 10 speed setup ( it was sram but it should still work with a shimano ) & just used the 1st 10 geaes ( 42-11 )

    last week i got a couple of x01 cassette's off crc for $264 us each, delivered

    so still not cheap, but a good option all the same.

    Note: They needed a new chain anyway so put an xx1 chain on there 10 speed setup.
    Their!

    How does that work? Isn't the spacing between the gears smaller with 11 speed?
    Supply Side Jesusnomisist

  93. #193
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by juan_speeder View Post
    Their!

    How does that work? Isn't the spacing between the gears smaller with 11 speed?
    No, The 1st gear is dished to make it closer to the spokes & the 11th gear doesn't have the same old lock ring that we are used to, So the 11th gear is a little closer to the frame.

    So the cassette is wider than the 10 speed so they could keep the same spacing, Were as with the 9 & 10 speed cassette's they have made them the same width so the spacing is closer on the 10 than on the 9.

    When my friended smashed his XX1 derailleur on a log, I put a 10 speed shifter & derailleur onto his bike running the XX1 cassette.

    I Also some times use a wheel with a 10 speed cassette on my bike with XX1 ( Just to save good tires ) The gears just need to be tuned to only use the 1st 10 gears.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  94. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    27
    May be a new XTR cassette:


  95. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    834

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    A well known pro sponsored by Shimano says watch early in 2014 for a Shimano announcement to the 42t cog cassettes.....will be 10spd though.

  96. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SFBMRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    253
    2014 Sea Otter will be the launch for this new system... me thinks.

  97. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,806
    Quote Originally Posted by < T.R.E.K > View Post
    May be a new XTR cassette:

    That's the Leonardi 9-42, not Shimano. I'd love to see such an offering from Shimano, but I'm not holding my breath. I'm quite surprised someone like Microshift or KCNC haven't jumped in to fill this void. Here's hoping!

  98. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    201
    Delete

  99. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by Gripo View Post
    A well known pro sponsored by Shimano says watch early in 2014 for a Shimano announcement to the 42t cog cassettes.....will be 10spd though.
    Fine by me...bring it on!

  100. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Gripo View Post
    A well known pro sponsored by Shimano says watch early in 2014 for a Shimano announcement to the 42t cog cassettes.....will be 10spd though.
    Perfect! Who needs 11 speed! 10 speed works perfectly with 11x42. 9 speed would also work fine: 11-13-15-18-22-26-31-36-42

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 2

Posting Permissions

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