Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 465
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    105

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Anybody know if shimano is coming up with something inovative as an answer to the already well acepted 1x11?? Maybe oval rings, 1x?? ...

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: shanem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    516
    I don't know if they have anything planned but I sure hope they do. I'm not a fa of SRAM stuff but that 1x11 looks right up my alley, I just wish it was Shimano.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Surfas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    808
    I like the idea but the cassette with a 42 aluminium tooth ... and a carbon crank ...
    I 'd like Shimano XTR crank with 30, 32, 28 and more rings, XTR cassette 13-42 for a normal freehub and that kill Sram XX

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: shanem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    516
    I agree. I see no need for a 10 tooth cog with the SRAM setup. I currently run a 36/28 up front with an 11-36 rear cassette. I can get away without even using the 28 up front most of the time. If Shimano were to make an 11-42 or a 12-42 rear 11 speed cassette I'd probably run just the 36 or even a 38 up front. The best part about the SRAM setup I think is the larger teeth on the front chainrings to eliminate the need for a chain guide. I just hope Shimano can come up with something similar.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Surfas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    808
    At front I need a 32 or 30 depending the trail for a 42 rear. For me 13-42 on the back can resolve the freehub problem

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    I'd LOVE to see this happen. I'd buy it.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,508
    Shimano's answer will the opposite XTR Di2. Just a hunch based on what we have already seen from Shimano.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    399
    I think shimano goes to 9t cassette like a capreo groupset... Using a small chainring (26t to 30t) with a 9-34t or 9-36t cassette, short cage derailleur, short chain and overall is more light than xx1 with equipared gear ratios... Hope is to launch 9-36t cassette... Shimano probably is in the same ballad...

    Send from Tapatalk via GalaxyTab

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    Apparently a 9 tooth cog is hard to pedal. You can read about it here.

    SRAM XX1: Component Development And Details | Cyclingnews.com

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    399
    I see this article after i posted... I understood the reason for don't go to 9t... Maybe new chain design can be the best solution for future.....

    Send from Tapatalk via GalaxyTab

  11. #11
    Baby Bear is in the house
    Reputation: r1Gel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by shanem View Post
    I don't know if they have anything planned but I sure hope they do. I'm not a fa of SRAM stuff but that 1x11 looks right up my alley, I just wish it was Shimano.
    plus one
    Better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

  12. #12
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbpri View Post
    Anybody know if shimano is coming up with something inovative as an answer to the already well acepted 1x11?? Maybe oval rings, 1x?? ...
    Why do you think XX1 is well excepted? Because theirs 5 companies making hubs for it? I see this as being a major hurdle for consumers. I hope Shimano comes out with a system that works on a normal freehub body and kills this silly Sram driver setup that's going to struggle to gain acceptance from the industry.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    There's a lot more than 5 companies compatible with xx1. The only ones I can think of that aren't compatible are Shimano (duh) and King.

  14. #14
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by limba View Post
    There's a lot more than 5 companies compatible with xx1. The only ones I can think of that aren't compatible are Shimano (duh) and King.
    It is more than 5, maybe 1/3 of the hub companies plan to be compatible by the beginning of the season. That doesn't change the fact that the driver and the 10 tooth cog that dictated it's adoption isn't necessary. An 11-42 would have been just as good for everybody and wouldn't have created the mess.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    Yeah, but it wouldn't be just as good for everybody. Everybody isn't you, everybody isn't me. A 32 chain ring and a 11 cog won't work for me. A 34/11 won't work either. Sram tried it's best to give the customer the biggest gear range they could with one chain ring and a big ass cassette.
    At least all the big companies, except the two I mentioned are on board. Is there a hub company that you absolutely need that's not compatible?
    Personally I don't like proprietary anything. I don't even like SRAM but the driver thing isn't that big of a deal.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    It is more than 5, maybe 1/3 of the hub companies plan to be compatible by the beginning of the season. That doesn't change the fact that the driver and the 10 tooth cog that dictated it's adoption isn't necessary. An 11-42 would have been just as good for everybody and wouldn't have created the mess.
    42-10 gives you 10% more range than 42-11. That's not insignificant. Most people who would be willing to pony up the $$$ necessary for this are likely running hubs which have an XX1 freehub available. The added cost of the new freehub is pretty small compared to the entire group, so why not? It's hardly a mess IMHO. I'd buy this in a heartbeat if it was available in X7 trim and not think twice about the cost of a hub body for my Hopes.

  17. #17
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    42-10 gives you 10% more range than 42-11. That's not insignificant. Most people who would be willing to pony up the $$$ necessary for this are likely running hubs which have an XX1 freehub available. The added cost of the new freehub is pretty small compared to the entire group, so why not? It's hardly a mess IMHO. I'd buy this in a heartbeat if it was available in X7 trim and not think twice about the cost of a hub body for my Hopes.

    Or you could go 44-11, with a bigger front ring and keep the existing free hub format. There are 3 factors in calculating gear inches, the cassette is one of them. Going from a 32 to a 33 or 34 isn't going to hurt anybody.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    Yeah but then you need an even bigger cassette cog to get the low gear you want. It's a compromise no matter what you do.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by customfab View Post
    Or you could go 44-11, with a bigger front ring and keep the existing free hub format. There are 3 factors in calculating gear inches, the cassette is one of them. Going from a 32 to a 33 or 34 isn't going to hurt anybody.
    Well, you'd need 46-11 to equal the range of 42-10. You'd also need a longer cage to take up the extra chain. The other cogs would also need to be larger, making it heavier.

    Again, I don't see what the big deal is about buying a new freehub body. If you HAD to use a SRAM hub, then I'd agree. If you're OK with putting down almost $1k for this drivetrain, then you probably aren't going to complain about another $90 for a freehub.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,529
    I also like this idea of 1x 10 or 11. I dont like it being SRAM or requiring a new freehub body. i've not had success with SRAM drivetrain in the past.

    I agree what would be great is if Shimano made the 11spd cassette 11 or 12 to 42 or 44, kept the same freehub body width, and dropped the complicated unidirectional chain with special pins and differing pins on each link. I hate their chains, just not trail-chaos-in-the-dark fix friendly.

    The other thing is that rear deraileur will have to be uber long cage. Back to snags and hitting rocks.
    We Ride In God's Country!

  21. #21
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by myitch View Post
    I also like this idea of 1x 10 or 11. I dont like it being SRAM or requiring a new freehub body. i've not had success with SRAM drivetrain in the past.

    I agree what would be great is if Shimano made the 11spd cassette 11 or 12 to 42 or 44, kept the same freehub body width, and dropped the complicated unidirectional chain with special pins and differing pins on each link. I hate their chains, just not trail-chaos-in-the-dark fix friendly.

    The other thing is that rear deraileur will have to be uber long cage. Back to snags and hitting rocks.
    I have spent the coin to give XX1 a go, But yes I see a market for a 42-11 to go on the std free hub.

    Mybe there is a X01 group set coming that will do that, I hope so.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-green-rdo-xx-001.jpg  

    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,529
    Quote Originally Posted by muzzanic View Post
    I have spent the coin to give XX1 a go, But yes I see a market for a 42-11 to go on the std free hub.

    Mybe there is a X01 group set coming that will do that, I hope so.
    So, how do you like it? Did you have experience on say, a 2x10 with 11-36 rear and 24-36 front? That's what I'd like to find out. I'm more interested in the comparison with the XX1 42t-32 vs Shimano 36-36 for climbing.
    We Ride In God's Country!

  23. #23
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by myitch View Post
    So, how do you like it? Did you have experience on say, a 2x10 with 11-36 rear and 24-36 front? That's what I'd like to find out. I'm more interested in the comparison with the XX1 42t-32 vs Shimano 36-36 for climbing.
    The bike is new so i will have a better idea in a week, But it feels real good.

    I have a 26/39 2x10 11-36 on my other bike that is all but the same so I will get some good back to back.

    My other bike has 36/22 2x10 11-36
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-trip-033.jpg  

    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,529
    Cool.

    I meant 24 or 22 front and 36 rear to XX1 32 or 34 front to 42 rear. Just by looking on paper the gear seems like it would be quite low for climbing, but IDK. We anxiously await your report
    We Ride In God's Country!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    32 ring with a 42 cog = 1.6
    24 ring with a 36 cog = 1.4
    22 ring with a 36 cog = 1.3

    So if you need the 22/36 the 1x11 won't work or you have to suffer on those climbs. Basically you lose a gear.

  26. #26
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by limba View Post
    32 ring with a 42 cog = 1.6
    24 ring with a 36 cog = 1.4
    22 ring with a 36 cog = 1.3

    So if you need the 22/36 the 1x11 won't work or you have to suffer on those climbs. Basically you lose a gear.
    You can tune the XX1 to better suit your needs, you can get 28,30,32,34,36,38 chain ring for the front, so yes you have less gears in a range but you can change were the range starts & finishs.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    Exactly. You just have to do the math and figure out how high and low a gear you need. I would want a 36. That would work for me. The other guy probably wants a 30.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    399
    Canfield launch a hub compatible with capreo cassette 9t sprocket.. Maybe 9t not so hard to pedalling..... Specialized team dh using own freehub to use 9t sprocket

    9-34t x 32t gives a interesting gear ratio for racing.... Jaroslav runs with 38 chainring and xx1 cassette... Iron legs required

    Send from Tapatalk via GalaxyTab

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    177
    I know it sounds crazy but when you think about it: how about making the chain pitch smaller?

    If manufacturing tolerances have allowed so much narrower chains (8 speed vs 10 speed) why not? Chain pins could remain the same diameter, and the plates could remain the same thickness, just shorter. The rollers would get smaller. Derailleurs and shifters could be compatible with existing setups (assuming the same number of speeds), the only thing that would have to be swapped would be jockey wheels which are nothing more than fancy plastic. That leaves the cassette, chain, and chainring to be must-haves for compatibility, which are all wear items anyway.

    Imagine a 20% shorter chain pitch allowing 20% more teeth per cog without changing the freehub body or needing larger chainrings. This would allow greater range on a cassette while better maintaining the ideal difference between gears of approximately 14%. 12,14,16,19,22,25,29,33,38,44,50 - for example. The 50t would be the size of a 40t with todays standards.

    Throw in a "floating chainring" that moves laterally to improve chainline at the extremes of the cassette and I'd be a really happy camper. Okay, I'm not sure if that one is possible, but it looks like it has been done before as seen here:

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cyberavner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    28
    Mutantclover,
    thumbs up for the innovative thinking!

  31. #31
    Canfield Brothers
    Reputation: flymybike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,103
    Quote Originally Posted by ftajiri View Post
    Canfield launch a hub compatible with capreo cassette 9t sprocket.. Maybe 9t not so hard to pedalling..... Specialized team dh using own freehub to use 9t sprocket

    9-34t x 32t gives a interesting gear ratio for racing.... Jaroslav runs with 38 chainring and xx1 cassette... Iron legs required

    Send from Tapatalk via GalaxyTab
    We followed Shimano's standard that has been around for quite a few years. It has worked well for 20" wheeled bikes to increase the gear range. We think this is a better solution because it shrinks the entire system. I have 1/2" better clearance because of the smaller front ring. I'm running a 28 front on a spiderless crank and a 9-36 rear cassette with a mid length derailleur my 29er and a 32 x 9-28 on my DH bike. Think about the gearing this way, just by running our rear hub (9T), you are able to drop the front ring size by appox 7 teeth. So a 32 tooth x 9T feels like a 39 tooth with an 11t. Bring on the spiderless cranks!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-28-9-36.jpg  

    http://www.canfieldbrothers.com/frames
    Building bikes that make you smile!
    www.mtbparks.com
    All Bike Park, All the time.

  32. #32
    Baby Bear is in the house
    Reputation: r1Gel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by r1Gel View Post
    plus one
    Wow, seriously, CoppellStereo, do you go around neg repping everyone whose posts don't agree with your opinion? Unbelievable
    Better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    399
    Can be swappable capreo free hub into deore xt rear hub?

    Send from Tapatalk via GalaxyTab

  34. #34
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by r1Gel View Post
    Wow, seriously, CoppellStereo, do you go around neg repping everyone whose posts don't agree with your opinion? Unbelievable
    I got it too. "never going to happen" is what he said. Curious why he didn't post that and something to back it up.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    958
    I would buy an 11-42 1x10 system today. I don't care who makes it, just hurry up already!

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by spsoon View Post
    I would buy an 11-42 1x10 system today. I don't care who makes it, just hurry up already!
    Me too, I need that 42t climbing gear.

  37. #37
    Baby Bear is in the house
    Reputation: r1Gel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by r1Gel View Post
    Wow, seriously, CoppellStereo, do you go around neg repping everyone whose posts don't agree with your opinion? Unbelievable
    Thanks to all those who + rep'd me. You didn't have to, but thanks all the same.
    I'm feeling the love

    PS
    I wanna return the favor but don't know how to without having to search for your posts in other threads (ya didn't post in this thread!)
    Better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

  38. #38
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,510
    [QUOTE=Mutantclover;10000213]

    . The 50t would be the size of a 40t with todays standards.

    Throw in a "floating chainring" that moves laterally to improve chainline at the extremes of the cassette and I'd be a really happy camper. Okay, I'm not sure if that one is possible, but it looks like it has been done before as seen here:


    The chain rings wouldn't get any smaller if you tightened the pitch of the chain up. Gearing is about the diameter of the gears not the number of teeth they have or engage.

    I like the idea of the floating front ring in theory With current drive trains I don't think it's necessarily, but it could open some doors. That little gear box you posted seems like it might be a good setup to run as a transmission inside the main frame of a complicated suspension bike.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6
    There is a 11-40 cassette made called the General Lee sold on ebay that looks interesting. I would post a link but I don't have enough posts on here to be allowed. I would love a 1X system but 1300.00 for the XX1 is a little steep for me.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    You can buy XX1 for under 1000 dollars. Do a search.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6
    Please tell me where you can buy the XX1 set up for under 1000. With the cranks, derailleur, cassette, hub adaptor and shifter I can't find for under 1300.00. For under 1000.00 I might give it a try. I also would have to buy a smaller front ring since I can't push a 32 where I ride. That's another 100.00$$$, must be made of unobtainium.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    399

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

    The more important question is about the extreme cogs... The bigger and the smaller.. Isn't the one gear more.... Mtb not sensitive as road bikes to need progressive downshifts or upshifts



    Send from Tapatalk via GalaxyTab

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    99
    Upgrade cycle has xx1 for $980.89 but no hub adapter. XX1 - Parts

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    403
    For anyone that can live with a narrower overall gearing range than the 10-42 XX1 cassette, you can get yourself to either end of the spectrum with a 1x10 setup today. 24 in front with an 11-36 cassette gets you the same granny ratio as XX1's 28 front 42 rear combo - with a lighter chain ring and a lighter cassette. Go 22 up front and you get an even lower granny ratio (and lighter weight, though negligible). Want more of the go fast gears and less of the granny climbing gears? Go larger up front...

    Fred

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    You can go 1x1 and get to either end of the gearing spectrum. Way lighter as well. *sarcasm*

    The whole point of XX1 (or at least one major benefit) is you're hardly giving up any of your gearing range compared to a traditional triple. That's why people are finally making the switch.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    56
    Guys, I have found a way to make a functional 9-40 10speed cassette! Yes, with bigger range than 10-42 XX1.

    Take one of the SRAM cassette wich include a 19t and 22t cogs(like some PG1070, 1050, 1030).

    For the lower side, take a Canfield 9t Microdrive Rear Hub(Simano capreo compatible) and put the Canfield 9t conversion cogs(which have 9-11-13-16 cogs).

    For the upper side, put a LEONARDI FACTORY “GENERAL LEE” cassette adapter which include 25-29 and 34-40 cogs.

    You en up with a wide range 10 speed cassette with pretty equal jumps between gear ratios!

    Te result will feel like this...

    tooth / step ratio "hardness" increase:

    40
    34 / 18%
    29 / 17%
    25 / 16%
    22 / 14%
    19 / 16%
    16 / 19%
    13 / 23%
    11 / 18%
    9 / 22%

    Somebody see any impediment to this assembly? Is this a good or bad idea?

    I let you look about price and weight...

    I personaly guess that the capreo 9t hub standard is the next move from shimano to face off the SRAM XX1.
    Last edited by in-vico; 03-19-2013 at 03:36 AM.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    I wonder if the new XTR will have Di2 or carbon wheels. Shimano makes awesome road/cross wheels. I'm sure they could make a $1200 carbon wheel and take a huge chunk out of Enve's market.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    177
    [QUOTE=customfab;10080677]
    Quote Originally Posted by Mutantclover View Post

    . The 50t would be the size of a 40t with todays standards.

    Throw in a "floating chainring" that moves laterally to improve chainline at the extremes of the cassette and I'd be a really happy camper. Okay, I'm not sure if that one is possible, but it looks like it has been done before as seen here:


    The chain rings wouldn't get any smaller if you tightened the pitch of the chain up. Gearing is about the diameter of the gears not the number of teeth they have or engage.

    I like the idea of the floating front ring in theory With current drive trains I don't think it's necessarily, but it could open some doors. That little gear box you posted seems like it might be a good setup to run as a transmission inside the main frame of a complicated suspension bike.
    I know what you mean by the diameter being what matters, but the reason I propose this is not to change diameter a great deal but rather to leave it almost the same while avoiding the problems associated with going down to very small numbers of teeth on a cog. There is a reason drivetrains have had a 11 tooth small cog for so long and its not just because of the cassette body standard. First off I hear that you feel some vibration and lose some efficiency on a 9 tooth. I could swear I have felt vibration on worn 11 tooth cogs to be honest. Secondly you are stuck with either too large or too small differences between one gear and another (10-11 tooth you have a 10% difference which is lower than optimal and 10-12 tooth is a 20% difference which is higher than optimal. It is important to optimize this for consistant feel and to maximize range/minimize cassette width).

    Secondly the floating ring I am imagining would not move the same distance as the width of the cassette, as it does in the picture I showed. The picture is just to give an idea of the sort of "floating" I'm talking about, and to illustrate the fact that the mechanism to make it do so could actually be pretty simple (theoretically. I don't know if it could be so simple and actually work). My idea is the chainring would only move a couple gears worth of distance either way. IE if you have a good chainline in the center 6 gears right now, an acceptable chainline in the 2nd and 9th gear, and a sub-optimal chainline in the 1st and 10th gears, having a chainring that would move 5 mm either direction of the center would eliminate that (and make it more viable to make the cassette a little wider too, while just using one chainring).

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cyberavner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    28
    Switching to a smaller pitch chain means that the teeth on all the gears will be proportionally smaller. I think that it could mean that the teeth will be easier to damage and/or the chain more likely to skip.

  50. #50
    Pex
    Pex is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    46
    Check out this photo, I believe this is a Shimano electronic 1x11 prototype.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    347

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    Check out this photo, I believe this is a Shimano electronic 1x11 prototype.

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...type=1&theater
    This is Sram XX1 just with a Specialized crank, isn't it?

  52. #52
    Carbon & Ti rule
    Reputation: muzzanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    5,406
    Quote Originally Posted by randan View Post
    This is Sram XX1 just with a Specialized crank, isn't it?
    That's what I was thinking.
    I have a 6 Berth Motorhome that I rent out . It is based in Tauranga, New Zealand

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    40
    Could this be a glimps at Di2 on Absalons new bike, or is it the new electronic system from Fox?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-image.jpg  


  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    That's it. There it is.

  55. #55
    Baby Bear is in the house
    Reputation: r1Gel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,033
    Looks to be the latter.
    Better to have and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bedell99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,253

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Sorry guys but that battery is just for the fox suspension. The derailleurs look to be standard XTR

    Erik

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    5

    nanodrive :-p

    Quote Originally Posted by Mutantclover View Post
    I know it sounds crazy but when you think about it: how about making the chain pitch smaller?

    If manufacturing tolerances have allowed so much narrower chains (8 speed vs 10 speed) why not? Chain pins could remain the same diameter, and the plates could remain the same thickness, just shorter. The rollers would get smaller. Derailleurs and shifters could be compatible with existing setups (assuming the same number of speeds), the only thing that would have to be swapped would be jockey wheels which are nothing more than fancy plastic. That leaves the cassette, chain, and chainring to be must-haves for compatibility, which are all wear items anyway.

    Imagine a 20% shorter chain pitch allowing 20% more teeth per cog without changing the freehub body or needing larger chainrings. This would allow greater range on a cassette while better maintaining the ideal difference between gears of approximately 14%. 12,14,16,19,22,25,29,33,38,44,50 - for example. The 50t would be the size of a 40t with todays standards.

    Throw in a "floating chainring" that moves laterally to improve chainline at the extremes of the cassette and I'd be a really happy camper. Okay, I'm not sure if that one is possible, but it looks like it has been done before as seen here:
    How about the nanodrive? hee hee hee
    Nanodrive Bicycle Chain Drive System
    And apparently Shimano already tried doing a 10mm pitch chain in the 80's?
    Last edited by zzzman20; 04-22-2013 at 08:42 PM.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    403
    But chain pitch only affects how many roller pins are in the chain, or how many potential points of failure from wear. Drive ratios are all about the diameters of the gears - smaller gears with more teeth are still smaller gears...

    Fred

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    45

    Does GT have the answer?

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-newgt.jpg

    Does this prototype GT drivetrain look normal XTR to you?

    No chain guide on a new Enduro weapon & the teeth on the front chainring look long. Is this a sign of the new Shimano 1x??

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,350
    There was a caption for that picture. It was something like "Dan Athertons new Enduro bike almost ready just needs a chainguide".

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    276
    I'm not sure what people are talking about here but a gear ratio is calculated off of the number of teeth in the system not the diameter of the sprocket.

    If you front was 28 and the rear was 42 it would be a 1.5:1 ratio, meaning for every time you spin the cranks 1 1/2 times the rear would go around 1 time.

    The same would be true if you front was a 30 and the rear was a 45. It would still take 1 1/2 spins of the cramk to spin the rear 1 time.

    The diameter is a result of the teeth count and the size of the teeth. Larger teeth/larger diameter will handle more torque and be stronger.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bedell99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,253

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    I wonder if they go to 11 speeds with next years XTR and just use the same cassette spacing as there 11 speed road group. I would love an additional 40 tooth gear and just keep the same cassette spacing as 36-11 10 speed cassette. To me this make sense.

    Erik

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    8
    Talked to Shimano guys at 24 Hour this week up outside of Toronto. His reply to 'what are you guys doing to compete with XX1?', he said - "It's going to be WAY cooler and much better, just wait!" No further comment but something is in the works.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    958
    And way more expensive? I don't really want something way cooler and better, I want a simple 10-speed 11-42 cassette that fits all my existing hubs.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by spsoon View Post
    And way more expensive? I don't really want something way cooler and better, I want a simple 10-speed 11-42 cassette that fits all my existing hubs.
    This. Though I'll accept a 10-42 since I run Hope hubs. No batteries, no custom bolt circles, no "cool" features that they'll try charging an extra $300 for. Give me a cassette that costs <$150, an SLX grade clutch derailleur and a crankset that allows a 28t ring. Done.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    835

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by car_nut View Post
    This. Though I'll accept a 10-42 since I run Hope hubs. No batteries, no custom bolt circles, no "cool" features that they'll try charging an extra $300 for. Give me a cassette that costs <$150, an SLX grade clutch derailleur and a crankset that allows a 28t ring. Done.
    Me 3, come on Shimano!!!!

  67. #67
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,971
    They are releasing 11 speed this fall probably across the lines. Reynolds is replacing my freehub with an 11 spd freehub.I asked if that meant 11 spd was coming and yes was the answer without giving me the answer.

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

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    I did my first ride on XX1 last night. It was great. I have no doubt that new XTR will blow everything else away.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by spsoon View Post
    And way more expensive? I don't really want something way cooler and better, I want a simple 10-speed 11-42 cassette that fits all my existing hubs.
    Anything other than this and I just won't do it. I'll even take an 11-40 cassette. Sorry. Not gunna do the General Lee cassette adapter. The tooth-number-jumps at the top are too big.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,727
    I think we'll find out in a week or so. I believe that's when the big dealer trade shows start happening.

  71. #71
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,744
    Patent US5954604 - Multiple sprocket assembly for a bicycle - Google Patents

    + electronics possibly. They have a ton of electronic related patents, like an electronic motor based dropper post. Maybe when model numbers roll over from M-986 (for XTR or M-786 for XT) to M-1000 series, maybe you can expect the *start* of the revolution, beginning with the XTR groupset. Got to be patient with Shimano, as they are highly engineer based, but many of their innovations don't seem to come until they think the timing's right.
    We're all on the same ship, and it's sinking.

  72. #72
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,510
    Quote Originally Posted by indyfab25 View Post
    They are releasing 11 speed this fall probably across the lines. Reynolds is replacing my freehub with an 11 spd freehub.I asked if that meant 11 spd was coming and yes was the answer without giving me the answer.

    Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 4 Beta
    new XTR won't poke it's head out this year.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,350
    We've already seen lot sof companies 2014 lines. I think we'd know by now about 2014.

  74. #74
    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 customfab View Post
    new XTR won't poke it's head out this year.
    Maybe, maybe not. In a conversation with the Shimano rep he said that come September they are going to be releasing stuff that is going to "do some serious damage" to Sram. Reps talk like this all the time. Who really knows if that is true even if they release new items. But, given 11 spd cassette bodies are showing up on mountain wheels for a reason, I am guessing 11spd Is coming whether new XTR is coming first or not. Could be 11 speed XT at a price point much lower than XX1. I could see that doing serious damage.



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

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,833
    Quote Originally Posted by indyfab25 View Post
    Could be 11 speed XT at a price point much lower than XX1. I could see that doing serious damage.
    I'm absolutely certain SRAM has the design work complete for X9 1x11. They're taking their time rolling it out since it's the only game in town. If Shimano released an XT tomorrow, you'd see X9 the day after.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,727
    I think if they just made a 10-speed 11-40 cassette that works with existing drivetrains and shifts well it would be big hit. They could also make some drop-stop style chain rings to go with it, but the aftermarket has that pretty well covered.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,350
    Quote Originally Posted by jabrabu View Post
    I think if they just made a 10-speed 11-40 cassette that works with existing drivetrains and shifts well it would be big hit. They could also make some drop-stop style chain rings to go with it, but the aftermarket has that pretty well covered.
    Probably need a new RD for that.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cyberavner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    28
    Even if Shimano came out with something new tomorrow, I doubt it will be less expansive than that the XX1 and the X01. If I was willing to drop that kind of money on a new drivetrain, I would have done so by now.

    Unless Shimano releases something at a lower price point off that bat, it really doesn't make much of a difference to me what they come out with at this time.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    835

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    Quote Originally Posted by cyberavner View Post
    Even if Shimano came out with something new tomorrow, I doubt it will be less expansive than that the XX1 and the X01. If I was willing to drop that kind of money on a new drivetrain, I would have done so by now.

    Unless Shimano releases something at a lower price point off that bat, it really doesn't make much of a difference to me what they come out with at this time.
    I'm with you on this, even though I prefer Shimano....

    The longer Shimano drag their feet the more it doesn't matter to me......get it Shimano!

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    786
    FWIW, it's extremely unlikely that there will be anything new or radical from Shimano this year at the August/September trade shows. There are a few new things, but the only new higher-level MTB bits are updated XTR brakes and cranksets with 40x30x22T or 38x24T, supposedly for bikes with 27.7/29" wheels. Yes there are a few other things too, but the big news is really 11 speed Ultegra which will have a Di2 hydraulic disc option from about November. All this stuff has been announced over the last few months, and there was nothing else hinted at during the AU 2014 dealer product launches during the last few weeks.

    I too was hoping for something like an 11-44T cassette that would fit existing hubs, but not this year. I'm sure that whatever Shimano come out with will not require or fit on an XD driver, but we'll have to wait until next year to see what's in the pipeline. It's interesting that Shimano have been later to market with 11 speed (than Campagnolo) and with 2x10 (SRAM), but with any luck everything will be fully sorted when it finally hits the deck. With all the new fatbikes and quasi-fatbikes coming out, it seems like Shimano are losing market share by having nothing to compete with XX1.

    I'm expecting new XTR (and maybe XT) groupsets to be announced next year...

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    177

    More thoughts

    Well since nobody liked my other idea, here is something more realistic. To create a superior 1-X drivetrain, Shimano is going to use the two technologies they already have that SRAM does not. The steel/carbon chainring and Di2. With Di2 you have effectively zero slop in your rear derailleur. Front shifting is what is most likely to damage a chain because you are pushing the loaded part of the chain laterally, so if you remove front shifting, your chain doesn't have to be as laterally strong. (Think about it, every time you've broken a chain the roller had pulled out of the outer plate right?) Thus it makes sense that they can make the chain narrower without it snapping, and thanks to the precision of Di2, make rear cog spacing narrower, without having derailleur alignment problems.

    The steel teeth on the chainring allow them to get away with narrower teeth from a wear/deformation perspective, while the carbon reinforcement prevents the chainring from folding even if it is the largest chainring and there is no bashguard. (See reasons steel alone is not commonly used for chainrings here, question #7: Frequently Asked Questions).


    Basically, Shimano should be able to pull off an even narrower chain and narrower cogs with the tech they already have, as long as its combined with the benefits that come along with no front shifting. So lets say that gets you an 11th gear all on its own. But IIRC, SRAM didn't really change the cog spacing for XX1, all they did was add an 11th cog next to the spokes, which is possible because the cog has such a large radius. If Shimano also puts a larger rear cog inboard like SRAM did, they should be able to go straight to 12 speed (and the cassette range that goes with it) while simultaneously introducing Di2 for MTB. And you would end up with a drivetrain that is better than XX1 in several ways.

    It would take them a long time to work all this out. I mean just mountain Di2, OR their first 1X drivetrain is a big project. Combining both makes tons of sense to me, but would be exponentially more work for their R&D.

    So there it is. Flame away.

    PS - those that want something inexpensive such as a larger range cassette for 9 or 10 speed - its perfectly possible but we all know the big money stuff always comes out first. Plus, IMO Shimano (and most manufacturing that comes out of Japan) is a company that doesn't like to make products with any kind of functional compromise. In their eyes, I'm sure having gear ratios that are higher than optimum is an example of such a compromise. (I know, I know, to many of us, the front derailleur is a much bigger compromise.) Also, as someone else pointed out, they would need the derailleurs to accommodate a very large variety of cassettes which would be a compromise as well.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,727
    Mutantclover, I like your thinking overall.

    I don't think they need to go much narrower on the cogs and chain, though. They already have 11-speed road groups that use a standard freehub, so that just needs to be adapted to a wider gear range for mtb use.

    I think we will see a Di2 XTR 11-speed drivetrain at some point (or maybe 12-speed as you suggested). And it will be super expensive. Eventually it will trickle down to XT and maybe SLX and be somewhat more affordable, but still not cheap.

    The other issue is what is the market for a system like this? Pro racers or other sponsored riders would likely use it, but what about the general market? Apparently there are enough people buying $10k bikes and Dura-Ace Di2 drivetrains that they keep making them, so there's probably a market for an ultra-expensive mtb group if it performs better than XX1.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    835

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11

    I really don't care for the Shimano way anymore.....they've lost their way.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    45
    Now Mr Shimano lets get this Alfine Di2 on a mountain bike?

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    786
    A long time ago now, Shimano patented a system that used a weird chain and had 14 cogs, two of which were mounted inboard of the cassette body, i.e., cantilevered over the spokes. This hasn't appeared, and it may be that the chain didn't really work, but there's no reason large sprockets cannot move further inboard; the rear mech isn't going to hit the spokes anyway.

    BTW, I cannot see how Di2 adds anything other than complication, expense and the probability of troubles after stream or river crossings. Bear in mind that road bikes get ridden in the rain, but typically do NOT have their drivetrains submerged, something that happens quite often off-road, in some areas/events at least.

    The simplest way for Shimano to come out with an XX1 answer (assuming they don't have a different/better idea) would be to use their existing freehub bodies, and add an extra cog (or two) inboard. This would require a new shifter and RD, but existing wheels could be used. Of course, Shimano might choose to modify the hub spacing somehow too.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: limba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,939
    I have Ultegra Di2 and XX1. Di2 blows away XX1 in the mud, in the rain, on grass and probably long term. A quick search on Jenson says an XX1 rear derailleur costs $305 and Ultegra Di2 is $249.

    Whatever Shimano comes up with will instantly make XX1 old news. Be patient, the next XTR will be worth it.

  87. #87
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,067
    That said, we have GOT to get away from this chain/cog/derailleur bullshyte.
    Di2, 12 speed...all piggy lipstick.

    We will get a REAL performance breakthrough when all of this crap is internal, strong, light, and efficient.
    It is clear that cost is basically no object....
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    786
    ^ Rohloff solves just about all problems except weight and cost, but of course isn't Shimano.

  89. #89
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,067
    Well, weight, cost, and performance (efficiency). I envision a 3rd gen of internals that will make a Rohloff look like a Sturmey Archer Drum brake, essentially.
    Space age shyte, biitches!
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    584
    Have you guys seen this? Looks promising!

    Pinkbike posted it and took it off right away. A friend was able to get it just in time.

    Prototype Shimano Wide Range Cassette - Crankworx Whistler 2013 - Pinkbike

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    958
    Here's hoping it comes true!

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: in the trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,953
    Gone again. Info?

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by in the trees View Post
    Gone again. Info?
    Ask and ye shall receive
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-image.jpg  

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-image.jpg  

    Shimano's answer to SRAM's 1x11-image.jpg  


  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: in the trees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,953
    Thank you! Fingers-crossed that this becomes available soon.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    187
    You're welcome. I'd say its a done deal. The market is too competitive for them to ignore 1x. I just wonder why the other site took down the article. I'm lookin forward to it, hopefully not too much longer!

  96. #96
    Got A Lust for Life...
    Reputation: indyfab25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,971
    Awesome

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

  97. #97
    Cleavage Of The Tetons
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,067
    Isn't that just a General Lee aftermarket cluster copy, with some machining?
    Bold move, Shimano!
    (But I hope it works)

    Leonardi Factory ?General Lee? 25T ? 40T Ten Speed Mountain Bike Cassette Adapter
    "We LOVE cows! They make trails for us.....

    And then we eat them."

  98. #98
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,744
    Shimano's answer to SRAM's X-Horizon RD:

    We're all on the same ship, and it's sinking.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,138
    I dont see Shimano producing a cassette like that with such a huge jump in ratios.

  100. #100
    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 Rick Draper View Post
    I dont see Shimano producing a cassette like that with such a huge jump in ratios.
    Ever see the mega range cassette?

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

Page 1 of 5 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
  •