New 12-36 cassette from Shimano

[20.100 FR]

For all you low ratio lovers, or may be also 2*9 ?

12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36
425 g

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by 20.100 FR

For all you low ratio lovers, or may be also 2*9 ?

12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36
425 g

425g? Will it eventually be coming out in the XTR flavor?

I'll stick with my 11-34 at 187g. The difference in 238g less of rotational weight alone ought to be worth about the same as 2 teeth.

BB

[Charlie Root]

Hi,

URL? Availability? Price?

Thanks!

[starre]

any chance shimano will come out with a 20-30-40 crank? i'd be much more interested than 36 out back

[20.100 FR]

Bruce, all rotating weight does not have the same inertia. The weight at the hub is like weight on the frame. This said, i agree with you, this is heavy ! There is still the option to go to a custom titanium cassette.

Starre : an 180mm XTR crankset in 20 30 40 oval (rotor) rings will do for me

Charlie : i've got no additionnal info then what i gave you. This info comes from a trusted source ;-)

[Guitar Ted]

Originally Posted by 20.100 FR

For all you low ratio lovers, or may be also 2*9 ?

12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36
425 g

Thanks for that info. I had heard rumors of this coming out, but the ratios and weight I had not seen posted before.

Bruce: I don't think Shimano is thinking that weight weenies and XC geeks will be at all interested in this, and before you say "1X9", I just want to also point out that Shimano will need to see folks like you actually using that cassette before they will consider making higher end versions of it. Typically, racers are not going to want a 36T out back, so I can totally see why there is no XT/XTR version. (Besides, mere mortals wouldn't even be able to afford those cassettes.)

I would advise a wait and see attitude. There may be a work around to get that cassette cog on a lighter weight cassette, or maybe you could employ a little "drillium".

At any rate, rock crawling, chunk riding, Alpine flying 29"er geeks should be rejoicing over this news. I for one think it's awesome.

EDIT: I see there is no 34T before the 36T. This sounds like a MegaRange cassette, which would be a disappointing thing if true. We'll see....

[teamdicky]

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

EDIT: I see there is no 34T before the 36T. This sounds like a MegaRange cassette, which would be a disappointing thing if true. We'll see....

Using my fingers and toes (good thing I wear sandals) I see a trend to defend the leap of tooth.

12-14=2
14-16=2
16-18=2
18-21=3
21-24=3
24-28=4
28-32=4
32-36=4

So sounds good enough to me. Gimme a 28-36 corn cob, and I'll go back to gears.

[MendonCycleSmith]

Good work Shimano. Make a product folks seem to be clamoring for, then make it so heavy, none of them want it. Guaranteed product failure. "See Mr. Shimano, I told you these were a bad idea"....

Sounds like it's time to get out the drill and dremel, and go Drillium on it's a$$

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

Thanks for that info. I had heard rumors of this coming out, but the ratios and weight I had not seen posted before.

Bruce: I don't think Shimano is thinking that weight weenies and XC geeks will be at all interested in this, and before you say "1X9", I just want to also point out that Shimano will need to see folks like you actually using that cassette before they will consider making higher end versions of it. Typically, racers are not going to want a 36T out back, so I can totally see why there is no XT/XTR version. (Besides, mere mortals wouldn't even be able to afford those cassettes.)

I would advise a wait and see attitude. There may be a work around to get that cassette cog on a lighter weight cassette, or maybe you could employ a little "drillium".

At any rate, rock crawling, chunk riding, Alpine flying 29"er geeks should be rejoicing over this news. I for one think it's awesome.

EDIT: I see there is no 34T before the 36T. This sounds like a MegaRange cassette, which would be a disappointing thing if true. We'll see....

Hey, I'm all for the option being available. I was just super-surprised by the weight when compared to the 32T and 34T Shimano 9 speed cassette weights. My chunkiest XT 11-34 weights 290g with the lockring and my SRAM 990 is 302g with lockring.

My guess is the initial Shimano cassette with the 36T is at the Deore HG 50 level (when comparing weights to their Deore HG-50 9 speed mountain).

For the race crowd, I could see a cassette with a 36T working well for 1 x 9 and 2 x 9 race sets for 29"ers. The Middleburn Duo that can come in the 29/42 combo works with a 34T, but granny gear can get a bit grueling later on in a race when hitting some steep climbs. But, the industry (including Middleburn) has also introduced 2 x 9 rings in the 27/40 combination for this season which removes the need for a 36T out back. And, of course, Action-Tec has been doing the big ring cassettes in Ti at a lighter weight than the Shimano - so there are plenty of options available.

I've got one of those 7 speed Shimano Alpine HG cassettes with a 34T out in the garage. I'll have to go out and weigh it to see what it weighs. It's probably around the 425g area.

I'm looking forward to seeing pictures of the new Shimano cassette.

BB

[Guitar Ted]

Originally Posted by teamdicky

Using my fingers and toes (good thing I wear sandals) I see a trend to defend the leap of tooth.

12-14=2
14-16=2
16-18=2
18-21=3
21-24=3
24-28=4
28-32=4
32-36=4

So sounds good enough to me. Gimme a 28-36 corn cob, and I'll go back to gears.

First of all your going to gears is as about as likely as you using a suspensio........whoops! Well...........ah...........anyway!

I just throw that out there due to all the bickering I have witnessed in regards to SRAMs jumps on their cassettes. Seems folks don't be likin' it. . That's all.

Rant on.......

Still it is a great idea. And where did all this gram counting for cassettes suddenly come from anyway? I thought people wanted to ride up stuff they couldn't before. Seems like now that you might be able to, all we hear is griping about the parts weight. Hey great! Thanks Shimano, but we'd rather walk than ride a part we think is too heavy. Go away until you can shave 200 grams off it and sell it for $29.95.

Rant off.............

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

First of all your going to gears is as about as likely as you using a suspensio........whoops! Well...........ah...........anyway!

I just throw that out there due to all the bickering I have witnessed in regards to SRAMs jumps on their cassettes. Seems folks don't be likin' it. . That's all.

Rant on.......

Still it is a great idea. And where did all this gram counting for cassettes suddenly come from anyway? I thought people wanted to ride up stuff they couldn't before. Seems like now that you might be able to, all we hear is griping about the parts weight. Hey great! Thanks Shimano, but we'd rather walk than ride a part we think is too heavy. Go away until you can shave 200 grams off it and sell it for $29.95.

Rant off.............

No, no. At 225g I'd be willing to pay $200+ for it. The XTR is a great cassette and I always pick one up on sale when I see it. Perfect shifting and light weight.

Power to weight ratio is important for me because even with training, I cannot produce more power than I am physically (and genetically) able to produce. So keeping weight low on my body and the machine is a concern for climbing. But I have to admit that spinning in a granny gear such as a 36T is not going to require as much power unless we were talking super-steeps where keeping traction and the bike upright the challenge all the more rewarding when cleared.

For alpine touring, and loaded touring this cassette will be well used as a less expensive alternative to the Action-Tec Ti alpine cassettes. We'll see how it sells and if it eventually leads to introducing those gearing options in the more expensive and lighter weight Shimano cassette lines.

BB

[ia_ss157]

94/58BCD cranks just make more sense I think. You can still run traditional gearing, or the lower 20/30/40t combo. The chainrings would be lighter, your chain would be lighter due to less links. I know that a 36t combined with current chainrings would wear slower, but come on. With all of these people out there riding SS 29ers whose lowest gear are commonly 32-20, do we really need a cassette that weighs just short of a pound? 1 ounce less than a pound. That's insane.

I just question the need for a 36t chainring. Especially when there are 20t chainrings available for 64BCD's. I know there are people who would utilize the the 36t in combination with the 20t. But similar things can be accomplished by just loosing 60-100gr with a lighter rear wheel and maybe even a little lighter tire. A little goes a long way in terms of rim weight and tire weight.

[M_S]

Freaking wussies.

[Cloxxki]

Very cool! Surely this will be the beginning of more.
New derailers to be built to accept even larger ranges?

I'm a 1*9 guy myself.

I have a new 38t, no shifting ramps, Rotor downhill/singlespeed Q-ring, which will serve duty on my new build, with lightweight 190-195mm custom cranks. Should work at least as well as the 36's I've been using in single ring setups.

I would have preferred the 11t to remain on the cassette though.
This one is like an 11-32 with the 11 replaced for a 38.
I'd like an 11-38 that goes like 11-13-15-18-21-24-28-33-38.
Or, better 7-speed : 11-13-16-20-25-31-38, but that's more for a custom Ti idea. Need to fire up SolidWorks again :-)

[BRUZED]

a good Idea if you wanted to run a 1X9. You loose some of the weight removing a shifter, cable and small ring.

[tbaier]

It was asked before - URL? Before we go speculating on all this, can anyone confirm the details, especially the weight. Of course its going to be heavier than smaller cassettes but 425g seems like a lot. Wouldn't necessarily stop me from using it though.

As a 1x9er I am excited about this.

[Guitar Ted]

Originally Posted by ia_ss157

94/58BCD cranks just make more sense I think. You can still run traditional gearing, or the lower 20/30/40t combo. The chainrings would be lighter, your chain would be lighter due to less links. I know that a 36t combined with current chainrings would wear slower, but come on. With all of these people out there riding SS 29ers whose lowest gear are commonly 32-20, do we really need a cassette that weighs just short of a pound? 1 ounce less than a pound. That's insane.

I just question the need for a 36t chainring. Especially when there are 20t chainrings available for 64BCD's. I know there are people who would utilize the the 36t in combination with the 20t. But similar things can be accomplished by just loosing 60-100gr with a lighter rear wheel and maybe even a little lighter tire. A little goes a long way in terms of rim weight and tire weight.

Sit down sometime with a rider from the Rockies and have a chat sometime. Climbs that can get into miles and altitudes that range into the five digit range for most of the ride. I think you'll come away convinced that there is indeed a need for this lower gearing, even with a 20T granny.

[ATBScott]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

425g? Will it eventually be coming out in the XTR flavor?

I'll stick with my 11-34 at 187g. The difference in 238g less of rotational weight alone ought to be worth about the same as 2 teeth.

BB

OK - I want to know where you got this, or who calibrates your scale! (Or did you go "drillium" on an XTR Cassette...?) The published weight for an XTR 11-32 unit is 224 grams.

http://bike.shimano.com/publish/cont..._mountain.html

Still I completely agree that 425g is pretty much among the bottom-feeders for this part. Like they made one for something sub-Alivio (358g for 11-32) or equivalent.

[LyNx]

I say why worry about the weight, it's at the hub, so doesn't play as much as rim/tyre weight, plus that 200g bonus is NOTHING compared to what the people mainly wanting this cassette could do to lose. I guess in this day and age if you can't get fit enough, just try to by the lightest something to make up for that extra weight you're carrying around and if that doesn't work blame the manufacturers, not your fat, lazy self

Strange I managed to get my sea level arse to make alot of those nice mile, upon mile climbs at stupid altitudes, running a 24/34/46 ring setup and standard 11-34 cassette - and I ain't no strongman, super hero type build

Rant off!!

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

Sit down sometime with a rider from the Rockies and have a chat sometime. Climbs that can get into miles and altitudes that range into the five digit range for most of the ride. I think you'll come away convinced that there is indeed a need for this lower gearing, even with a 20T granny.

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by ATBScott

OK - I want to know where you got this, or who calibrates your scale! (Or did you go "drillium" on an XTR Cassette...?) The published weight for an XTR 11-32 unit is 224 grams.

http://bike.shimano.com/publish/cont..._mountain.html

Still I completely agree that 425g is pretty much among the bottom-feeders for this part. Like they made one for something sub-Alivio (358g for 11-32) or equivalent.

luckynino on eBay sells the Ti cassettes. Mine is heavy compared to the 32t and 30t versions. You can also pick up the Cycle King Ti cassette from a Hong Kong seller here.

There are threads over on the weight weenie board devoted to the introduction and refinement of luckynino's Ti cassette. It currently is in the 2nd generation and is trick.

Here's the first generation which I just replaced with the new 2nd (the red)...

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

Sit down sometime with a rider from the Rockies and have a chat sometime. Climbs that can get into miles and altitudes that range into the five digit range for most of the ride. I think you'll come away convinced that there is indeed a need for this lower gearing, even with a 20T granny.

Bingo!

Not only the Alps, buy Briones in the East Bay area in California. Tough, tough, tough climbs that do not let up until one gets to the top of the ridge. So tough, it's barf city about 1/2 way up the climb. Or about 1/4 way up on a hot California day. The 36T will be perfect for that type of stuff to stay out of the red zone/no turning back/call the medic heart rate range. And the 36T cassette would be ideal for loaded touring off road.

I've been following this board for what - 6 years now? And the gearing issue always ends up in a stinkin' manhood argument. Or a you must be out of shape argument. I'd be happy to pull my manhood out, lay it on the table for a beer and do some sustained climbs on a 29"er with the naysayers in the mountains or East Bay. I'll bring my gearing and the naysayer can come with their manly gearing. First one to puke loses. First one to bail on the climb of my choice loses.

No bail, no push for me.



Stairs?



I ride 'em (those stairs)...and I'm in 29T front, 34T rear...



One of my favorite climbs in the Black Hills requiring 20T/34T and a little bit of luck because it just keeps going up and curling around with rock chunks everywhere. Slow motion, diesel engine type of climbing.



Another favorite section looking down on that same trail



What's wrong with running gearing that allows one to clear some nasty climbs - be they long and at altitude, short and steep, tough and technical, etc... . If the tools are there to help promote mountain goating - I'm there. It's worth the challenge and satisfaction for me.

BB

[hellocook]

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

Sit down sometime with a rider from the Rockies and have a chat sometime. Climbs that can get into miles and altitudes that range into the five digit range for most of the ride. I think you'll come away convinced that there is indeed a need for this lower gearing, even with a 20T granny.

could not agree more. i am in south america, andean region. our trails start at 8000-1000' and go up to 15000'. climbs are very, very steep and in combination with 29er wheels and 180mm cranks some more greaing options come pretty handy...

[asphaltdude]

Interesting

[FoShizzle]

gee, what a surprise. with the popularity increasing for 29ers and given the typical lazy sloth who is attracted to 29ers, I am shocked they stopped at 36t

[langen]

Here it is - taken from the Norwegian mtb-site terrengsykkel.no:


Also - a 29er specific rear hub, designed to take the higher torque due to the 36t in the rear:


Whole story (in Norwegian):
http://terrengsykkel.no/index.php?id=2598

[GeoKrpan]

Uhhhh....did anyone plug the numbers into the Sheldon Brown Gear Calculator?
Chainring 22 32 44
34 Cog 18.8 27.3 37.5
36 Cog 17.7 25.8 35.4
Difference 1.1 1.5 2.1

Those differences are immaterial.
The weight of the cassette is not rotating weight.

[SingingSingleTracker]

Originally Posted by GeoKrpan

The weight of the cassette is not rotating weight.

That's good news.

For a minute, I thought my hubs, 203mm rotors, cranks, pedals, spokes, rims, tubes, and tires were all supposed to rotate. I wondered what I was doing wrong.

[GeoKrpan]

Originally Posted by SingingSingleTracker

That's good news.

For a minute, I thought my hubs, 203mm rotors, cranks, pedals, spokes, rims, tubes, and tires were all supposed to rotate. I wondered what I was doing wrong.

I should have said, The cassette is not rotating weight in the same sense as rims, tires, and tubes.
Weight at the hub has very little effect on the acceleration of the wheel.

[Guitar Ted]

Interestingly, Shimano is also going to introduce a 10 speed road cassette with a 28T low gear meant to be used with compact road gearing. Apparently there also will be some new rear derailluers to work with itas well. So, it would seem that Shimano is listening when it comes to gearing concerns. Could a 20/30/42 crank be far behind?

And as far as the gearing calculations given by GeoKrpan, all I have to say is that the lowest combination is lower than what we had before, which is what folks wanted. It would be much more significant if you were in 22-34 and needed one more gear to keep going. (Also, I'd be willing to bet most folks will pair this with 20-30-42 gearing, making those differences even bigger. )

[pimpbot]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

Bingo!

Not only the Alps, buy Briones in the East Bay area in California. Tough, tough, tough climbs that do not let up until one gets to the top of the ridge. So tough, it's barf city about 1/2 way up the climb. Or about 1/4 way up on a hot California day. The 36T will be perfect for that type of stuff to stay out of the red zone/no turning back/call the medic heart rate range. And the 36T cassette would be ideal for loaded touring off road.

I've been following this board for what - 6 years now? And the gearing issue always ends up in a stinkin' manhood argument. Or a you must be out of shape argument. I'd be happy to pull my manhood out, lay it on the table for a beer and do some sustained climbs on a 29"er with the naysayers in the mountains or East Bay. I'll bring my gearing and the naysayer can come with their manly gearing. First one to puke loses. First one to bail on the climb of my choice loses.

No bail, no push for me.



Stairs?



I ride 'em (those stairs)...and I'm in 29T front, 34T rear...



One of my favorite climbs in the Black Hills requiring 20T/34T and a little bit of luck because it just keeps going up and curling around with rock chunks everywhere. Slow motion, diesel engine type of climbing.



Another favorite section looking down on that same trail



What's wrong with running gearing that allows one to clear some nasty climbs - be they long and at altitude, short and steep, tough and technical, etc... . If the tools are there to help promote mountain goating - I'm there. It's worth the challenge and satisfaction for me.

BB

... and yeah, I ride those trails in Briones as well. I've cleaned those climbs, but it was not easy at all, and I was close to passing out when I did it on a 100F day. THose climbs are nose of the saddle up your tucas, low gear, lean over the front, and grind away for half an hour like that.

To the haters who say 'ride more, get in shape' blah blah blah: You know what? I already ride as much as my busy schedule allows, and with a two year old and a newborn kid. I ride steep stuff, and love a good climb. I'm in as good shape as I'm going to be until I can ride more.... oh, and on that... when I ride.. I want to... ride... not hike. If I'm lucky, I get one half-day ride a week, but I'm usually not that lucky. If that means i need a stupid low granny gear, fine... call me a big fat p#$$# if you like, but I don't care.... I'm riding.

rant-off

BTW, I'm rocking a heavy-ish, geared 29er with a 20*34, and that gets me most places... when I'm not riding the singlespeed.

[GeoKrpan]

Chainrings 20 30 42
34 Cog 17.1 25.6 35.8
36 Cog 16.1 24.2 33.8
Difference 1.0 1.4 2.0

Using 20/30/42 chainrings results in even less of a difference.

It's ingenious of Shimano. It's won't do a damn thing for them but it's what they want.

[WTB-rider]

"I will use any means necessary, fair or unfair" to make my ride more enjoyable.

Hell, if I could figure a way to make that old 46T chainring I've got hanging around work in the rear, I'd do it.

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by pimpbot

... and yeah, I ride those trails in Briones as well. I've cleaned those climbs, but it was not easy at all, and I was close to passing out when I did it on a 100F day. THose climbs are nose of the saddle up your tucas, low gear, lean over the front, and grind away for half an hour like that.

To the haters who say 'ride more, get in shape' blah blah blah: You know what? I already ride as much as my busy schedule allows, and with a two year old and a newborn kid. I ride steep stuff, and love a good climb. I'm in as good shape as I'm going to be until I can ride more.... oh, and on that... when I ride.. I want to... ride... not hike. If I'm lucky, I get one half-day ride a week, but I'm usually not that lucky. If that means i need a stupid low granny gear, fine... call me a big fat p#$$# if you like, but I don't care.... I'm riding.

Finally - another rider who knows what I'm talking about concerning Briones!!!

It's always my first ride out there when I come to visit (I used to live in Walnut Creek). When I go to visit family, I stay at Rossmoor and ride over to Lafayette and head up the trails into Briones. I'd love to ride that climb with all the naysayers with less functional gearing for that climb.

I'll be out in June to visit and will have my bike along. I'll make sure and hook up with you for a ride so we can suffer together. I'll bring the camera to take some shots and post up every time this gearing subject matter comes up. Thank God it is not at a high altitude. Being close to sea level is hard enough. Imagine that climb at 8 - 11K feet.....

BB

[29erchico]

Well. turning that 36t rear cog with my 18t granny ring would result in a very easy to compute 14.5 gear inches. Too low? I thought that the 15.35 gear inch low, that I have now, would possibly be too low but I have learned to adapt to riding very slowly thru some pretty crazy stuff. Granted some things must be climbed with speed, but I have really been surprised by how much steep nasty stuff can be taken really slow.

Haters of low gears feel free to flame on! I'm used to it...

[jrm]

Originally Posted by BRUZED

a good Idea if you wanted to run a 1X9. You loose some of the weight removing a shifter, cable and small ring.

a 20/30/40 2 piece crankset set up. less chain, smaller gaps and tighter shifting.

[Titus Maximus]

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

Typically, racers are not going to want a 36T out back, so I can totally see why there is no XT/XTR version.

I would venture a guess that of the people who use XT/XTR cassettes, a distinct majority do not race.

Originally Posted by langen

Also - a 29er specific rear hub, designed to take the higher torque due to the 36t in the rear:

I wonder if it comes with 29er skewers?

[Guitar Ted]

Originally Posted by Titus Maximus

I would venture a guess that of the people who use XT/XTR cassettes, a distinct majority do not race.

That may be correct, but XTR isn't designed with the input of these "people" you speak of.

[Titus Maximus]

We the "people" want a XT 12-36 cassette. Let them input that!

[Tony]

Originally Posted by langen

Also - a 29er specific rear hub, designed to take the higher torque due to the 36t in the rear:

I'm more interested in this hub than in the cassette. Running 22x34 I've broken every free-hub I've ever used except for Chris King. If Shimano sells this hub at a decent price point, I might be able to save a ton of money on a spare wheelset.

[Natedogz]

Looks great, except for the weight and where's the 34t cog???

Originally Posted by jrm

a 20/30/40 2 piece crankset set up. less chain, smaller gaps and tighter shifting.

That would be even nicer...I think...

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

Sit down sometime with a rider from the Rockies and have a chat sometime. Climbs that can get into miles and altitudes that range into the five digit range for most of the ride. I think you'll come away convinced that there is indeed a need for this lower gearing, even with a 20T granny.

Excellent point!

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

luckynino on eBay sells the Ti cassettes. Mine is heavy compared to the 32t and 30t versions. You can also pick up the Cycle King Ti cassette from a Hong Kong seller....

There are threads over on the weight weenie board devoted to the introduction and refinement of luckynino's Ti cassette. It currently is in the 2nd generation and is trick.

Here's the first generation which I just replaced with the new 2nd (the red)...

Boing, sweeet!!

Originally Posted by langen

Here it is - taken from the Norwegian mtb-site terrengsykkel.no:

Also - a 29er specific rear hub, designed to take the higher torque due to the 36t in the rear:

Whole story (in Norwegian):
http://terrengsykkel.no/index.php?id=2598

.................and more great news!

[VT Mike]

Originally Posted by BRUZED

a good Idea if you wanted to run a 1X9. You loose some of the weight removing a shifter, cable and small ring.

An 11-34 cassette would be better for 1x9 than a 12-36, as it offers a wider range of gear ratios. With the 12-36, the biggest cog has 3 times as many teeth as the smallest cog. On the 11-34, the biggest cog has 3.09 times as many teeth as the smallest cog.

Of course I'm assuming you can run a small enough chainring on your cranks to get the gearing you want with the 11-34.

If they made an 11-36, that would be something for 1x9 riders to get excited about.

[Titus Maximus]

Originally Posted by GeoKrpan

Uhhhh....did anyone plug the numbers into the Sheldon Brown Gear Calculator?
Chainring 22 32 44
34 Cog 18.8 27.3 37.5
36 Cog 17.7 25.8 35.4
Difference 1.1 1.5 2.1

Those differences are immaterial.

The difference between an 18 inch gear and a 19 inch gear is not immaterial. It's about a 6% difference and would be noticeable, especially at the very slow speeds and steep inclines that such a gear would be used at. The 16 inch gear of 20x36 would be discernible from the 17 as well.

[sinnerspinner]

Wow, I am shocked at the number of riders out there looking for even lower gear ratios!? Really? a 36T cassette? Your rear derailleur troubles are only beginning...

I'm not going to call names or accuse people of being "weenies", but it does seem as though a majority of you are interested in this product because you feel that you "need" it for some reason or another. This "need" is no doubt in response to something that you are feeling or experiencing on your bike; I'm guessing a lack of power? This does not suprise me, as I've noticed a huge increase in embarrasing rider posture on the trails over the last several years. Your hands hurt because your seat is too high and your cleats are too far forward. OR, Your back hurts because you are sitting straight up in a chair. You can't climb because your bars are too close and too high. ( see: saddle too high, cleats forward) If you are newer to the sport you have been bombarded product info and things to buy, but no one is talking about the engine..!? You are having trouble climbing because you are not getting big, smooth power. Before transforming your bike into a shifting abomination, why not make a commitment to becoming a student of your personal bike fit? It requires research, thought and time, but you will experience speed, comfort, and fewer injuries if you are diligent. Begin with SMALL adjustments, but have the big picture in mind.

[guttmjo]

I'm running a Suntour 5speed freewheel with a 38 tooth big cog (shifted by a Huret Duopar) on my road bike with a 42/52 double in front, for a 30" low.

Torque problems never occurred to me, but how does one calculate torque strains on the hub independent from gear inches?

I've heard of issues with fixed gears shifting ECO hubs.
Josh
SanD, CA

[guttmjo]

I'm running a Suntour 5speed freewheel with a 38 tooth big cog (shifted by a Huret Duopar) on my road bike with a 42/52 double in front, for a 30" low.

Torque problems never occurred to me, but how does one calculate torque strains on the hub independent from gear inches?

I've heard of issues with fixed gears shifting ECO hubs.
Josh
SanD, CA

[Titus Maximus]

Originally Posted by sinnerspinner

Wow, I am shocked at the number of riders out there looking for even lower gear ratios!? Really? a 36T cassette? Your rear derailleur troubles are only beginning...

I'm not going to call names or accuse people of being "weenies", but it does seem as though a majority of you are interested in this product because you feel that you "need" it for some reason or another. This "need" is no doubt in response to something that you are feeling or experiencing on your bike; I'm guessing a lack of power? This does not suprise me, as I've noticed a huge increase in embarrasing rider posture on the trails over the last several years. Your hands hurt because your seat is too high and your cleats are too far forward. OR, Your back hurts because you are sitting straight up in a chair. You can't climb because your bars are too close and too high. ( see: saddle too high, cleats forward) If you are newer to the sport you have been bombarded product info and things to buy, but no one is talking about the engine..!? You are having trouble climbing because you are not getting big, smooth power. Before transforming your bike into a shifting abomination, why not make a commitment to becoming a student of your personal bike fit? It requires research, thought and time, but you will experience speed, comfort, and fewer injuries if you are diligent. Begin with SMALL adjustments, but have the big picture in mind.

Thanks for that. We ill-fitted weenies appreciate your concern.

[PuddleDuck]

Nice. But I want a lighter version.

I also want an XT level 20/30/40 crankset

[DrDon]

I say why worry about the weight, it's at the hub, so doesn't play as much as rim/tyre weight, plus that 200g bonus is NOTHING compared to what the people mainly wanting this cassette could do to lose. I guess in this day and age if you can't get fit enough, just try to by the lightest something to make up for that extra weight you're carrying around and if that doesn't work blame the manufacturers, not your fat, lazy self

Strange I managed to get my sea level arse to make alot of those nice mile, upon mile climbs at stupid altitudes, running a 24/34/46 ring setup and standard 11-34 cassette - and I ain't no strongman, super hero type build

Your point? I going to hire someone to tow me up when I hit 300lbs.

[29erchico]

Originally Posted by Tony

I'm more interested in this hub than in the cassette. Running 22x34 I've broken every free-hub I've ever used except for Chris King. If Shimano sells this hub at a decent price point, I might be able to save a ton of money on a spare wheelset.

Does this mean that you have broken a hub equipped with DT's star ratchet system?

[Jayem]

Originally Posted by 29erchico

Does this mean that you have broken a hub equipped with DT's star ratchet system?

I have. Luckily it's easy to replace/fix, but nothing is foolproof.

[Wish I Were Riding]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

Finally - another rider who knows what I'm talking about concerning Briones!!!

Ping me when you come again too. I don't ride at Briones that often but I sure do ride there. I'm usually at places that are a little easier to SS on in the East Bay.

Oh and Briones is easy compared to Las Trampas.

[M_S]

Joking about out-of-shapeness aside, this would be great for off road touring.

[RandyBoy]

Seems more cost effective to just get a 20 tooth for up front, same 10% gear reduction.

[wadester]

This is definitely an interesting new part, for those of who occasionally have wished for a lower gear whilst grinding up something with a 20x34 low.

I note that when I comtemplated switching to 29er I was concerned that since I had 20x34 with a 26er (and wished for lower) - a 29er would need an 18x34 or similar. I find that the rolling characteristics of the 29 have let me live with the 20x34, even tho it is a higher gear inch (overall leverage ratio) due to the larger wheel.

I still would pick one of these up and try it out. Maybe on a 36er

[Oliver]

Do we really need a 36t cassette, a 34 x 22 seems plenty.

[Torque Wrench]

I'm old and weak and want that 29 x 36 so I can recover after blowing up on my 1 x 9.

[MikeDee]

Will this cassette work with my SRAM X-10 derailleur or do I have to go to a special Shimano derailleur and new shifters?

[jcaino]

this should work just fine with a sram 9 speed setup. not sure what sram x10 is though.

[Titus Maximus]

Originally Posted by MikeDee

Will this cassette work with my SRAM X-10 derailleur or do I have to go to a special Shimano derailleur and new shifters?

There should be no problem switching between Shimano and SRAM 9-speed cassettes.

[dancruz]

Right on BruceBrown and Pimpbot....I ride in Colorado and it is steep 20-30percent grades. I try to ride 4-5 days a week. So a 36 would be sweet..heck make it a 38! I just switched to this 29er thing and love it. A good day is 15-20 miles and 1800ft or more of climbing. I'm 45 and like beer and some junk food, so this is good as my body gets.
As Pimpbot said I try to ride everything..no hiking for me. Some days I wished I had my Nomad back. It took me a while to get my R.I.P 9 that only weighs 29lbs up the hill. But I got it down now, but still would love a 36........

[~martini~]

I grew up riding in the age of 24x28 low gears, and 26" wheels. I've since moved on to the greener pastures of 29" wheels and single speeds. Oh, and 1x9's.

That being said, don't you run into a point where gearing becomes so slow that is really IS faster to walk? Where the going is slow enough that balance is hard to keep? I dunno if its just me, or what, but it seems like a 20 x 36 combo would be nearing trackstand territory while climbing. Sounds like it'd actually be more difficult.

Take this with a grain of salt. Its been a while since I've done any BIG climbing. I do plenty of steep here, but nothing big or long.

[Cloxxki]

I'm all for super steep climbing and trying to ride it out, but I tumble back over before I run out of gears. And trust me, I did ride up some steeps in my better days, where those on 26" just could not ride.
If you're of medium to short height, and have really long chainstays on your 29" bike, I can see how you could crawl up vertically. But you'd be riding by yourself, as other cyclist would never even attempt the things you could ride up.

These 12-36 cassettes will be great for those coming off typical 44/32/22-11/32or34 fitted 26" bikes, upgrading to 29" with the same chainring sizes. It will feel decently familiar to both 11-32 and 11-34 cassettes.

What's next? Will 29" frame makers add a few mm to their dropout lengths to make use of regular RD's with greater cassettes fit even better?

[LyNx]

..............We have a winner!! Maybe I just don't have mad balance, but even in 24-34 I have trouble on it when I really slow down and just couldn't imagine what it'd be like using either a 36t cog or a 20t granny farless both in combo. I'd guess maybe 1-1.5mph unless you're spinning like a hamster on crack and then why not have the higher gearing anyhow .

Originally Posted by ~martini~

I grew up riding in the age of 24x28 low gears, and 26" wheels. I've since moved on to the greener pastures of 29" wheels and single speeds. Oh, and 1x9's.

That being said, don't you run into a point where gearing becomes so slow that is really IS faster to walk? Where the going is slow enough that balance is hard to keep? I dunno if its just me, or what, but it seems like a 20 x 36 combo would be nearing trackstand territory while climbing. Sounds like it'd actually be more difficult.

Take this with a grain of salt. Its been a while since I've done any BIG climbing. I do plenty of steep here, but nothing big or long.

[Guitar Ted]

Originally Posted by ~martini~

I grew up riding in the age of 24x28 low gears, and 26" wheels. I've since moved on to the greener pastures of 29" wheels and single speeds. Oh, and 1x9's.

That being said, don't you run into a point where gearing becomes so slow that is really IS faster to walk? Where the going is slow enough that balance is hard to keep? I dunno if its just me, or what, but it seems like a 20 x 36 combo would be nearing trackstand territory while climbing. Sounds like it'd actually be more difficult.

Take this with a grain of salt. Its been a while since I've done any BIG climbing. I do plenty of steep here, but nothing big or long.

Being able to ride is more efficient than walking, albeit riding at a slow pace. As it was explained to me, it isn't about how fast you are riding, it's that you are riding.

It was also explained to me that having that gear may mean that you clean a section you would have to walk or bail off on with a 20-34 combination. Again, we ride to ride, not to have to bail off on a steep.

Finally, it was explained to me that the big cog out back is needed as a bailout when your bonking, working against an Alpine wind, or what have you.

By the way, you've seen lots of pics where this particular guy rides Marty.

I was as big a naysayer as anyone on this thread, but again: Sit down and talk with someone that rides these crazy climbs and high altitude stuff. Have an open mind, and you'll get it.

[dancruz]

I ride a 22x34 up 20-28 percent grades 3 times a week.....so a 36 will work for me ...thanks Guitarted at least somebody gets it!..It took me a while to keep up with my 26incher buddies but shimano to the rescue...any of you guys ride out here in Colorado?

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by LyNx

..............We have a winner!! Maybe I just don't have mad balance, but even in 24-34 I have trouble on it when I really slow down and just couldn't imagine what it'd be like using either a 36t cog or a 20t granny farless both in combo. I'd guess maybe 1-1.5mph unless you're spinning like a hamster on crack and then why not have the higher gearing anyhow .

So you have identified yourself as not having athletic balance, but lambasting those of us who do as being lazy or having a lack of fitness?

I rode a 20T ring with a 34T granny cog on my 26"er in the Alps up stuff that was so steep, it was not spinning like a hamster on crack. It was measured pedal power cadence between 60 - 80 rpm vs. balance vs. red zone heart rate. Very hard to keep it out of the 105%, non sustainable heart rate zone while staying on the bike. The 20 - 34 combo on the 29"er is not quite the same forgiveness, but I imagine the 20 - 36 would be.

You have to understand that climbing super steep long stuff that requires tremendous balance, athleticism, power, positioning on the bike has only one limiting factor - maximum heart rate. Until you have actually tried a 20 - 34 combo or a 20 - 36 combo, you'll just have to trust those of us who have and stop imagining incorrectly.

And work on your athleticism - ya big lazy out of shape weenie.....

BB

[Miker J]

Originally Posted by starre

any chance shimano will come out with a 20-30-40 crank? i'd be much more interested than 36 out back

First off, those larger tooth jumps out back make for poor shifting.

I've already bent a handfull of those 34t cogs out back from either mis-shifts or whacking the cassette with a rock.

Too much weight.

You'll need a longer chain.

Up front shifting would be improved with the smaller rings. I'd actually like to see a 20-30-38. Better clearance. Better shifting. Many folks could then get away with a 11-32t out back which is lighter, stronger and better shifting than an 11-34t, let alone a 36t out back. Personally I like the 12-32 the best if you can find them.

Rings up front. How often are you really wearing out a 42 or 44t ring due to chain wear (as opposed to rock hits)? It's not often compared to wearing out the middle and granny.

When you think about this topic from all angles, going to a smaller triple up front seems like the obvious choice.

If Shimano came out with an XT level 20-30-40t (or even 38t) they would not be able to keep them on the shelves.

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by Wish I Were Riding

Ping me when you come again too. I don't ride at Briones that often but I sure do ride there. I'm usually at places that are a little easier to SS on in the East Bay.

Oh and Briones is easy compared to Las Trampas.

I'll ping you. Should be the latter 2 weeks in June if the wife gets her way. I'll treat the post ride beer(s).

Las Trampas = yummy.

BB

[29erchico]

Originally Posted by Miker J

First off, those larger tooth jumps out back make for poor shifting.

I've already bent a handfull of those 34t cogs out back from either mis-shifts or whacking the cassette with a rock.

Too much weight.

You'll need a longer chain.

Up front shifting would be improved with the smaller rings. I'd actually like to see a 20-30-38. Better clearance. Better shifting. Many folks could then get away with a 11-32t out back which is lighter, stronger and better shifting than an 11-34t, let alone a 36t out back. Personally I like the 12-32 the best if you can find them.

Rings up front. How often are you really wearing out a 42 or 44t ring due to chain wear (as opposed to rock hits)? It's not often compared to wearing out the middle and granny.

When you think about this topic from all angles, going to a smaller triple up front seems like the obvious choice.

If Shimano came out with an XT level 20-30-40t (or even 38t) they would not be able to keep them on the shelves.

Smaller triple up front? How does 18-26-36 grab you?

Check it out here: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=360780&page=1

The pics show my initial setup, chainrings are the same sizes but I have gone to a XTR (FCM-900 square taper) 180mm crank and added a ring guard made from a 42t outer ring with the teeth cut off mounted on the outer position.

In the 18/34 low gear I have learned to ride as slowly as 1mph. I can ride at up to about 4mph without spinning like mad. I have found the low to be more useful in techy climbing than I thought it might be.

The lower gearing on my Monk was really useful out in Colorado last summer. Some really long climbs out there and especially on the Monarch Crest, you get up to around 12k feet on that one.

As far as the 12-36 cassette goes, I'll get one when they come out, slap on my 11t high cog from my current xt 11-34 and literally give it a whirl. Might be too low, but how will I know until I try it?

[D.F.L.]

Mt. Hillaby: 334 Meters. highest point in Barbados. Terrain: relatively flat; rises gently to central highland region.

Perhaps it was discovered by the great mountain climber, Sir Edmund Hillaby

I'll just say it again and again and again: we're only asking for the equivalent of a 26er 22/34 low gear. If you think that this is too low, please spend your time and energy telling the 26er people that their CURRENT gearing is too low and they're worthless and weak.

I like to try climbing things that others prefer to walk. I'm not on a bike because I like to walk. I don't care if walking is faster; to me, this is a challenge. When I'm on a steep technical climb, at my aerobic threshold, making a big step-up or power move takes me anaerobic, and I need a bail-out gear to get my heart rate down. Getting off and walking isn't a good solution when the goal is to clean a section.

So it's my ego (wanting to make a climb) vs someone else' ego (thinks I'm a wuss)...

Originally Posted by LyNx

..............We have a winner!! Maybe I just don't have mad balance, but even in 24-34 I have trouble on it when I really slow down and just couldn't imagine what it'd be like using either a 36t cog or a 20t granny farless both in combo. I'd guess maybe 1-1.5mph unless you're spinning like a hamster on crack and then why not have the higher gearing anyhow .

[Singlespeedpunk]

Sit down sometime with a rider from the Rockies and have a chat sometime. Climbs that can get into miles and altitudes that range into the five digit range for most of the ride. I think you'll come away convinced that there is indeed a need for this lower gearing, even with a 20T granny.

34:20 on my 29er did fine in the Indian Himalayas on the MTB Himachal 9day race and the 23mile / 1mile vertical Jalori Pass (10,500') climb on Day6*

Gearies need to TTFU

SSP

*I am in no way fit or competative, I just get on with what I have.

[pacman]

Interesting thread. Manhood schmanhood, ride what you want. But if you want the advantage of a 36T you don't have to buy one.


Going from 34T to 36T confers the exact same advantage as going from 170mm to 180mm cranks.

[starre]

dancruz: i am not trying to steal the thread, but did u ever write up a comparison between the Nomad and RIP? i'd be interested to know if the Nomad climbed better or worse than the RIP and if you find the RIP more difficult/cumbersome than the Nomad in going down slower more techy stuff. many thanks! starre

Originally Posted by dancruz

Right on BruceBrown and Pimpbot....I ride in Colorado and it is steep 20-30percent grades. I try to ride 4-5 days a week. So a 36 would be sweet..heck make it a 38! I just switched to this 29er thing and love it. A good day is 15-20 miles and 1800ft or more of climbing. I'm 45 and like beer and some junk food, so this is good as my body gets.
As Pimpbot said I try to ride everything..no hiking for me. Some days I wished I had my Nomad back. It took me a while to get my R.I.P 9 that only weighs 29lbs up the hill. But I got it down now, but still would love a 36........

[dancruz]

After thinking about it the smaller ring up front would be better.....you nailed it 29erchico...thanks for your input...Monarch Crest was awsome last year..can't wait to ride it this year on my 29er...do any of these smaller rings fit on a new XTR crank?

[Jayem]

Originally Posted by dancruz

I ride a 22x34 up 20-28 percent grades 3 times a week.....so a 36 will work for me ...thanks Guitarted at least somebody gets it!..It took me a while to keep up with my 26incher buddies but shimano to the rescue...any of you guys ride out here in Colorado?

I don't see how you could balance going up hills that steep in such a low gear. It simply makes me go too slow, and makes spinning out or losing control too easy. 20-28% is pretty normal for here (in a mountanous part of AZ), but I can't climb most of the stuff in the easiest gear, I have to be in a harder gear, to have enough inertia. While I do climb everything in the middle gear (so maybe my granny-gear balance isn't as good?), I feel I have to be in something harder than the easiest gear for the above consideration.

[dancruz]

Jayem...need a harder gear for the 20% or better!..who are you Lance?...you need to show me what I'm doing wrong...i can't ride anything harder than my 22x34 up those climbs...and i'm still hurtin bad

[Cloxxki]

Steepest somewhat cleanable climb I ever found in a race, I did not make on the granny gear. No way to get traction. In the middle ring, I did make it. Getting off the bike cost me time. This was short and crazy steep, but too long to be able to sprint it up, carrying momentum.

[Beaker13]

Originally Posted by dancruz

Jayem...need a harder gear for the 20% or better!..who are you Lance?...you need to show me what I'm doing wrong...i can't ride anything harder than my 22x34 up those climbs...and i'm still hurtin bad

Maybe a few less wings and Bud Lights and you can climb Ginny in the big ring.

Just keep looking at your top tube and do what it says, "Pedal Damn It"

[LyNx]

Just come on down for a visit with that attitude then I'd love to show you around, heck I'd even almost make sure you had a free place to stay, just to be able to watch the fun ROFLMA Just ask any who has come down here what happens on an island that is only 144 square miles, it's freaking hilarious when all the bad boys come down and first thing ask after the first hill is "Don't you guys have switchbacks?" We just laugh mostly Won't even get into the temps etc down here. There's a few who visit these boards who have ridden with me down here, so if they want to chime in...

Just curious where you got that wondeful description from?

FYI I have been to CO twice, first time I ran a standard 22/32/44 ring and 11-34 cassette, last time I ran a 24/34/46 set and 17-34 casette, wasn't nearly as fit as the first time and still made it up a what my technical skills would allow.

Originally Posted by D.F.L.

Mt. Hillaby: 334 Meters. highest point in Barbados. Terrain: relatively flat; rises gently to central highland region.

Perhaps it was discovered by the great mountain climber, Sir Edmund Hillaby

I'll just say it again and again and again: we're only asking for the equivalent of a 26er 22/34 low gear. If you think that this is too low, please spend your time and energy telling the 26er people that their CURRENT gearing is too low and they're worthless and weak.

I like to try climbing things that others prefer to walk. I'm not on a bike because I like to walk. I don't care if walking is faster; to me, this is a challenge. When I'm on a steep technical climb, at my aerobic threshold, making a big step-up or power move takes me anaerobic, and I need a bail-out gear to get my heart rate down. Getting off and walking isn't a good solution when the goal is to clean a section.

So it's my ego (wanting to make a climb) vs someone else' ego (thinks I'm a wuss)...

Yeah, my balance just plain sucks under 1.5mph, which is about where I calculate I would be with that gearing. I know anyone can balance going that slow, even your Gran Seriously I've gone down to about 2.5mph on a few climbs and balancing for any length of time, no matter what gear ratio you use will not be sustainable for very long. I'll make sure next visit I get someone to map out all those type trails where I'm visiting and go see if I can clean it using my "manly" 24-34 combo

FYI, I HATE to walk my bike and try to ride EVRYTHING.

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

So you have identified yourself as not having athletic balance, but lambasting those of us who do as being lazy or having a lack of fitness? .................................................. .............
And work on your athleticism - ya big lazy out of shape weenie.....

BB

[willtsmith_nwi]

I'm not sure about the cassette, but I'll take one of the special high load freehubs. I've been laying waste to XT freehubs.

[yourdaguy]

I am glad to see this cassette available, but I will vote with they guys that want to go smaller in the front. That seems like a much better idea. Either way you go, the strength of the freehub becomes a problem as the torque multiplies.

[pimpbot]

Originally Posted by Titus Maximus

Thanks for that. We ill-fitted weenies appreciate your concern.

.... when other people tell you what you don't need or want?

I ride with a guy who was bagging on me using dual control shifters with a regular rise derailleur, saying I'm doing it all wrong. He was also bagging on me for leaving the thumb releases on my dual controls. He was actually getting pissed at me for not removing them.

[Datalogger]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

luckynino on eBay sells the Ti cassettes. Mine is heavy compared to the 32t and 30t versions. You can also pick up the Cycle King Ti cassette from a Hong Kong seller here.

There are threads over on the weight weenie board devoted to the introduction and refinement of luckynino's Ti cassette. It currently is in the 2nd generation and is trick.

Here's the first generation which I just replaced with the new 2nd (the red)...

How have these cassettes held up? Strong enough for a 250+lb Clyde?

Originally Posted by pimpbot

.... when other people tell you what you don't need or want?

I ride with a guy who was bagging on me using dual control shifters with a regular rise derailleur, saying I'm doing it all wrong. He was also bagging on me for leaving the thumb releases on my dual controls. He was actually getting pissed at me for not removing them.

Tell him to ride his own damn bike... Lol.

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by Datalogger

How have these cassettes held up? Strong enough for a 250+lb Clyde?

There are comparable to an XTR for longevity, strength, etc... . 1st generation had some rivets that were too tall on some cassettes causing possible chain catch glitches unless filed down. Actually, only 3 or 4 of his cassettes had this problem (mine being one of those few). I had Nino swap mine out to a 2nd generation. Thread about it here. There are pictures and explanations in that thread. Great customer service for the swap.

For all practical purposes, the two larger cog sections are just like the XTR cassette. The smaller cogs and spacers is where the weight savings comes over the XTR. In fact, Nino combined the smaller cogs and spacers with the two larger portions of an XTR cassette and the weight was the same - 187g for the 11-34T.

These are XC race cassettes (XTR, Nino's Ti, Cycle King Ti). I don't think it comes down to whether or not one is a Clyde. Probably more to do with how much power you can put to the pedal. That doesn't change as your weight goes up, so I don't see why body weight would effect the strength of a cassette. I would, however, ask in that thread linked above about your weight and if you should have any concerns before buying any $180+ XC race cassette.

BB

[Guitar Ted]

Originally Posted by yourdaguy

I am glad to see this cassette available, but I will vote with they guys that want to go smaller in the front. That seems like a much better idea. Either way you go, the strength of the freehub becomes a problem as the torque multiplies.

Many folks looking at this cassette will be doing the low geared crankset as well.

Alot of you folks maybe weren't around in the early 90's when we were running Micro-Drive cranksets, 34T rear cogs, and some were even using Quad Tamers........on 26"ers!

Low gearing isn't anything new, it's just finally getting around to us 29"er folks. That's the way I see it. YMMV

[starre]

BruceBrown: bingo! you are right on as these tough uphills take our body to the limit. it seems like such a crazy kind of upside down sport, doesn't it? in walking, running, swimming, etc you can decide how fast you want to go, how much you want to push yourself. not in MTB, here the terrain rules, here is where the terrain will dictate the limits of your body. probably the best tool i have bought for my bike is a heart rate monitor and i can tell you after 2 years of 2 to 5 rides a week on my 29er, there is no ride where at some stage i have not gone over 85% of my maximal heart rate. so it's pretty obvious i would like lower gearing on my bike for when the climbs get longer and tougher, but not at the expense of so much weight added. i'm no weight weenie, but every added once over 30 lbs is real pain to haul up those hills.

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

I rode a 20T ring with a 34T granny cog on my 26"er in the Alps up stuff that was so steep, it was not spinning like a hamster on crack. It was measured pedal power cadence between 60 - 80 rpm vs. balance vs. red zone heart rate. Very hard to keep it out of the 105%, non sustainable heart rate zone while staying on the bike. The 20 - 34 combo on the 29"er is not quite the same forgiveness, but I imagine the 20 - 36 would be.

[yourdaguy]

I wouldn't totally trust a titanium cog with very low gearing and a big strong guy. I have been on the tandem listserve for years and there are several stories of XTR 11-34's/12-34/s breaking under the strain of 2 legs. Generally, the lowest gear a tandeem runs is 30-34 although 24-34 is possible but almost nobody uses it, so I would expect a big strong guy with a 22-34 to put at least as much torque through the cog as a 30-34 geared tandem does. Only total weight weenie tandems run XTR cassetts.

Another data point is that the rear hub that Santana uses on their Sweet 16 tandem wheels has all the exact same internals as the XT MTB hub Shimano makes except they space them out to 160 instead of 135 and have a wider flange spacing for a tandem. They seldom ever break on tandems, but I read about people on this list breaking those same hubs all the time. So if the tandems are breaking the cogs but seldom the hubs and the MTB's are breaking the hubs then I would be hesitant use ti cogs if I was a big strong rider and had low gearing. Like the guy that wrote he has broken 4 XT hubs-definately should not get an XTR cassett.

Since I am old and realatively light and a spinner, I have an XTR 12-34 on my Niner.

[rockhound]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

But, the industry (including Middleburn) has also introduced 2 x 9 rings in the 27/40 combination for this season which removes the need for a 36T out back.

Who is making 27-40 double cranks besides Middleburn?

What is the bcd on the chainrings?

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by rockhound

Who is making 27-40 double cranks besides Middleburn?

What is the bcd on the chainrings?

Rotor has 2 x 9 Q Rings in 27/40 that take the 110/74mm BCD. Action-Tec makes a 27T in 58mm BCD. Mattias on the Weight Weenie board has the proper equipment for you to custom order a steel, aluminum or Ti 27T (he made an aluminum for me in 58mm BCD). And, of course, there are a lot of 26T or 28T granny rings available in various BCD's from a variety of brands.

TA makes all kinds of goodies including a 40T 94mm BCD that can be used in the outer or middle slot. I don't know if they make a 27T inner ring, but they do make a 26T and a 28T. Sugino makes a 38T, a 39T and a 40T for 110mm BCD that can be run in the middle slot, but the cheaper one has no ramps/pins. I don't know if they have a more expensive version with ramps or not. I know they do in 42T. Salsa makes a 40T in 94mm BCD, but no ramps. They have a 39T in 110mm BCD as well, but no ramps. Middleburn makes a 40T that is ramped and comes in 94mm BCD as well as 110mm BCD.

I'm sure there are several other chainring options available - not to mention a custom Ti order from Action-Tec or Boone (are they still doing custom orders?).

The easiest 2 x 9 set up, IMO, will be the Middleburn Duo in 27/40 because you just pop it on an ISIS 113mm spindle and presto - perfect chainline. As I have said before, Middleburn used to make the 27/40 combo back in the RS1 days. Now that they are in the RS7 and RS8 model cycles, it's nice to see them bring it back as the 27/40 2 x 9 covers a good range for XC racing in the mountains.

BB

[pimpbot]

Originally Posted by ~martini~

I grew up riding in the age of 24x28 low gears, and 26" wheels. I've since moved on to the greener pastures of 29" wheels and single speeds. Oh, and 1x9's.

That being said, don't you run into a point where gearing becomes so slow that is really IS faster to walk? Where the going is slow enough that balance is hard to keep? I dunno if its just me, or what, but it seems like a 20 x 36 combo would be nearing trackstand territory while climbing. Sounds like it'd actually be more difficult.

Take this with a grain of salt. Its been a while since I've done any BIG climbing. I do plenty of steep here, but nothing big or long.

... but like I said before, I'm out to ride, not walk. I don't care which is faster.

Also, with a 36 in back, I would could probably get away with the 22t up front just fine, which means I don;t have to mod my cranks to fit a 20t and deal with chain suck, get super expensive new 5 arm compact, or find older used 5 arm compact and hope the square taper interface is still good, and I'd rather not go back to ISIS disposable bottom brackets.

*edit*

Hey, on a thread jacking side note.... What older cranks should I look for in a compact 5 arm? RaceFace Turbines are kinda pricey, even used. IIRC, there was a shimano XT and LX 5 arm compact... M730s? Anything else?

[Datalogger]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

These are XC race cassettes (XTR, Nino's Ti, Cycle King Ti). I don't think it comes down to whether or not one is a Clyde. Probably more to do with how much power you can put to the pedal. That doesn't change as your weight goes up, so I don't see why body weight would effect the strength of a cassette. I would, however, ask in that thread linked above about your weight and if you should have any concerns before buying any $180+ XC race cassette.

BB

Thanks for the info. My weight is up because I am into weightlifting and bodybuilding and spend the winter in the gym. I normally weigh 230. (Still rather heavy.) My strength goes up alot with my weight (but endurance sure does take a hit.)

I'll post in that thread.

[Davidcopperfield]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

The 20 - 34 combo on the 29"er is not quite the same forgiveness, but I imagine the 20 - 36 would be.

20x36 on a 29er is a tad lighter than 22x34 on 26er. 20/30/42x12-36 ought to become a standard on 29ers.

[AuntieAPE]

Count me as another old weak guy who wants one for the 1*9 - any info about price and when it's coming out?

[BruceBrown]

Originally Posted by AuntieAPE

Count me as another old weak guy who wants one for the 1*9 - any info about price and when it's coming out?

If you base it on the other Shimano HG 9 speed 11 - 34T cassettes, the price will range in the $29.99 - $85 range give or take a few bucks. At least that would be my guess. Maybe slightly higher due to the larger granny cog.

To compare, here are the prices of Action-Tec's Titanium 9 speed cassettes (which is comparable with other Ti cassettes). Not trying to compare these with the new Shimano 12-36T, just showing the prices of those that are available now.

1. 9 11-32 $192.50 1132-9
2. 9 11-34 $218.00 1134-9
3. 9 11-36 $259.00 1136-9
4. 9 11-38 $280.00 1138-9
5. 9 11-39 $280.00 1139-9

BB

[jrm]

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=485289

I like the RF turbines alot except for having to use a BB, whether it be a ISIS or Sq taper. A 30T 104 bcd ring that would fit my two piece XT would be perfect.

Anyway Diego told me last time you were over that he wants to study law @ harvard so you better save the dunkits..

[mgersib]

Originally Posted by Guitar Ted

Interestingly, Shimano is also going to introduce a 10 speed road cassette with a 28T low gear meant to be used with compact road gearing. Apparently there also will be some new rear derailluers to work with itas well. So, it would seem that Shimano is listening when it comes to gearing concerns.

You know, it's funny they think they need to redesign their derailleurs to work with a piddly 28t cog, because I'm running a current generation Ultegra 10s rear der on a 9s 11-32 cassette with no problems (a 12-25 is shown in the photos here) on my Fargo. I had to dial a bit of B-tension in to get it to have a sufficient gap on the 32t, but once I did that, it's been hammering off shifts really nicely. It's totally solid, which backs up the common wisdom that Shimano rates the "official" capacity of their derailleurs conservatively.

But yeah, it's encouraging to hear they're listening to the needs of riders looking for lower gearing, and especially with respect to 29-inch wheels. I certainly hope for a return to the 58/94 bolt circle, which is what I'm running on my Fargo, in the form of a '96-era XT crankset, currently with the stock 22/32/44 rings, but I'll be changing that around soon. I just got the bike built...

[Davidcopperfield]

Is that new SH hub be stronger than CK hubs?

[Miker J]

Originally Posted by BruceBrown

Rotor has 2 x 9 Q Rings in 27/40 that take the 110/74mm BCD. Action-Tec makes a 27T in 58mm BCD. Mattias on the Weight Weenie board has the proper equipment for you to custom order a steel, aluminum or Ti 27T (he made an aluminum for me in 58mm BCD). And, of course, there are a lot of 26T or 28T granny rings available in various BCD's from a variety of brands.

TA makes all kinds of goodies including a 40T 94mm BCD that can be used in the outer or middle slot. I don't know if they make a 27T inner ring, but they do make a 26T and a 28T. Sugino makes a 38T, a 39T and a 40T for 110mm BCD that can be run in the middle slot, but the cheaper one has no ramps/pins. I don't know if they have a more expensive version with ramps or not. I know they do in 42T. Salsa makes a 40T in 94mm BCD, but no ramps. They have a 39T in 110mm BCD as well, but no ramps. Middleburn makes a 40T that is ramped and comes in 94mm BCD as well as 110mm BCD.

I'm sure there are several other chainring options available - not to mention a custom Ti order from Action-Tec or Boone (are they still doing custom orders?).

The easiest 2 x 9 set up, IMO, will be the Middleburn Duo in 27/40 because you just pop it on an ISIS 113mm spindle and presto - perfect chainline. As I have said before, Middleburn used to make the 27/40 combo back in the RS1 days. Now that they are in the RS7 and RS8 model cycles, it's nice to see them bring it back as the 27/40 2 x 9 covers a good range for XC racing in the mountains.

BB

What's the small you can go on the middle of a 94BCD/compact crank?

Thanks.

[Miker J]

Originally Posted by 29erchico

Smaller triple up front? How does 18-26-36 grab you?

Check it out here: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=360780&page=1

The pics show my initial setup, chainrings are the same sizes but I have gone to a XTR (FCM-900 square taper) 180mm crank and added a ring guard made from a 42t outer ring with the teeth cut off mounted on the outer position.

In the 18/34 low gear I have learned to ride as slowly as 1mph. I can ride at up to about 4mph without spinning like mad. I have found the low to be more useful in techy climbing than I thought it might be.

The lower gearing on my Monk was really useful out in Colorado last summer. Some really long climbs out there and especially on the Monarch Crest, you get up to around 12k feet on that one.

As far as the 12-36 cassette goes, I'll get one when they come out, slap on my 11t high cog from my current xt 11-34 and literally give it a whirl. Might be too low, but how will I know until I try it?

I imagine you'd have to push the crank outboard with a longer spindle?

[rockhound]

Originally Posted by Miker J

What's the small you can go on the middle of a 94BCD/compact crank?

Thanks.

That depends.

30t chainrings are readily available.

29t chainrings can be found if you look hard.

28t chainrings were made at one time but can not be found anymore.