SRAM (officially) releases 12-sp "Eagle" groupset

[Mr_Gimby]

http://www.bikerumor.com/2016/03/24/sram-eagle-12-speed-mountain-bike-groups-let-you-soar-far-and-wide-complete-tech-overview/

And....GO!

[nmrt]

I'd buy it. And why not?!
It will bolt onto my existing 11-speed XX1 setup. And I will not need any funky cassette driver or a new wheel.


http://www.bikerumor.com/2016/03/24/sram-eagle-12-speed-mountain-bike-groups-let-you-soar-far-and-wide-complete-tech-overview/

And....GO!

[firerescuefin]

I never chime in on the SRAM bashing, but it looks like Bike Radar just hired SRAM to write the article for them. Talk about lapping it up.

[purpurite]

They might not always hit a home run with the products they develop, but they are at least trying to push the envelope. Looks ridiculous to me, but so does a lot of contemporary MTB stuff in my eyes, so that's not anything new.

I'd try it if it fit into my needs.

[ofcounsel]

I'll move to it on my next build in about 2 years time, I presume. But for now, I love my XX1 set ups.

[livingminimal]

I'm good with a front derailleur, thanks.

[john903]

"the complexity of using a front derailleur" Ughh ok. I am sorry but this is just silly to me but we new 12 speed would be next oh well I guess it is called progress. I will keep my old tech campy 10 speed utilizing a front derailleur.

[stephenmarklay]

You know it looks pretty cool to me and I bet it will be what we are all riding one day.

I am a little concerned for SRAM after reading this quote ''hris Hilton says they’ll never tell us about another mountain bike front derailleur again. They are no longer doing any development work on mountain bike front derailleurs, and those engineers have been moved to other projects. ‘'

I certainly hope they stay away from brakes :no: I had to.

[Tony]

Some of the biggest innovations, clipless pedals, dropper seat posts, tubeless tires, suspension, disc brakes, plus size...faced opposition from both experienced riders and those who just like to bash.
Good on Sram as It takes courage to create and move forward with a new product and the 1x is a perfect example of thinking out of the box.

The more I ride 1x the more I'm leaning towards 1x for all my mtbs. 1x12 is just the next step in that direction.

[thirdgenbird]

Focusing on 1x may be a good way to push mtb development, but 1x itself is far from out of the box. They were doing 1x in cross for ages. It wasn't just people removing their derailleurs either. 1x cranksets were sold specifically to this market. From a broader scope, 1x predates front derailleurs. SRAM also did not invent the clutched rear derailleur or wide/narrow cog.

[Louis]

THAT is just about the ugliest thing I've seen in a long time.

http://brimages.bikeboardmedia.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/sram-X01-eagle-12speed-group-details40-600x400.jpg

[Tony]

Focusing on 1x may be a good way to push mtb development, but 1x itself is far from out of the box. They were doing 1x in cross for ages. It wasn't just people removing their derailleurs either. 1x cranksets were sold specifically to this market. From a broader scope, 1x predates front derailleurs. SRAM also did not invent the clutched rear derailleur or wide/narrow cog.

Yes, SRAM quickly took notice of cross and set out to design a mtb drivetrain system like nothing the market had seen before.

[thirdgenbird]

Yes, SRAM quickly took notice of cross and set out to design a mtb drivetrain system like nothing the market had seen before.

I'm not sure I would call it quick. 1x was a thing in cross for decades. Various mountain bike manufactures also marketed 1x mountain bikes through the years. I remember ironhorse offering a 1x xc bike in the early 2000s. The only new thing SRAM 1x offered was a larger cog. This was an important part of making it stick, but it doesn't fit my definition of out of the box or "like nothing seen before."

[Tony]

I'm not sure I would call it quick. 1x was a thing in cross for decades. Various mountain bike manufactures also marketed 1x mountain bikes through the years. I remember ironhorse offering a 1x xc bike in the early 2000s. The only new thing SRAM 1x offered was a larger cog. This was an important part of making it stick, but it doesn't fit my definition of out of the box or "like nothing seen before."

Out of the box may not be the right words. I think they were the ones to connect the Puzzle Pieces and make a working system that others are now following.

First with the Straight P rear derailleur. This der featured a "straight parallelogram that kept all chain movement limited to the horizontal axis and kept a constant gap between the top pulley of the rear derailleur and each cog on the cassette thus reducing chain slap and ghost-shifting."

Second was the single-chainring, developing a chainring that keeps the chain in place on the bumpiest trails. Sram finalized a design called X-Sync. By alternating between wide teeth and narrow teeth on the chain ring.

Third was the cassette. A much wider range rear cassette was needed.

[thirdgenbird]

That's just a bunch of marketing.

ive not had ghost shifting with a standard slant parallelogram rear derailleur and no one is copying this.

As already discussed, single chainrings were not a new thing. Neither are wide narrow cogs. New to cycling but wide narrow is also just one method of chain retention the isn't needed for a successful 1x bike. I've owned three, none of them have had a wide narrow ring. I've been riding 1x since about 2004.

SRAM added a 42t cog to the already existing 36t. Like I said, this was important to leading the 1x charge. Hats off to SRAM for that I guess.

Probably the most important part of the 1x puzzle was the clutch rear derailleur. 1x is possible without, but this is the most important part or reducing chain slap and chain loss.

Check out Shamano Capero. It's 1x and uses a shorted freehub body with cogs under 11t. Add a clutch (another shimano first) and you have all of the fundamental parts to a SRAM 1x group. The larger cogs are just refinements.

http://velo-kiev.at.ua/Shimano/40_02.jpg

[Dustin]

XX1 looked silly to me when I first saw it, but was an early adopter and now wouldn't go back. I'll probably move to 1x12 in a year or two. Gotta wear out my brand new new x01 cassette first.

[MacMan]

I'm all about 1x for the mtb, and would try this if starting from scratch. Don't see a need to upgrade though. Does anyone really need a 50T? I ride in the mountains and 10/42 is plenty, even with 34 up front.

[Tony]

I'm all about 1x for the mtb, and would try this if starting from scratch. Don't see a need to upgrade though. Does anyone really need a 50T? I ride in the mountains and 10/42 is plenty, even with 34 up front.

I'm learning it's about having a wider gear range. If you're ok with the climbing gear on a 1x11 setup with a 34-tooth ring and a 10-42 cassette, going with a 36 tooth ring on an 10-50 cassette will feel almost the same when climbing. However, a 50t greatly extends the higher end of the cassette, making it much less likely that you'll spin out on a high-speed descent.

[benb]

Yah this all looks good to me. I just don't think I'd necessarily try it unless I was starting from scratch with a brand new MTB that had the following design elements:

- Pivot location(s) & tire clearances redesigned for no front derailleur.
- Possibly lower Q-factor? (That'd be pretty nice on a MTB!)

[Fatty]

What's old is new again?

http://images.craigslist.org/00k0k_99AkOGLi9vz_600x450.jpg

[peanutgallery]

Another power dome cassette?

Assuming that it will be even more craptastic than the road version when exposed to the rigors of the mtb

Expensive junque, wait a while

[DrSpoke]

On my road bikes, I've been Campagnolo only since 1976.

On my mountain bikes, I've been Shimano only since 1996.

Recently I purchased an urban adventure bike, a Ridley X-Trail with Shimano 6800. I got Shimano primarily because Campagnolo didn't have hydraulic disc brakes. And, I'm not aware of any production gravel bike with Campy as OEM. The bike is pretty awesome but I drop a chain on almost every ride. And it's not when shifting, it usually just bounces off on washboard roads. BTW, I had to install a SRAM cassette on it, an 11-36, as Shimano doesn't make one.

A couple of months ago I purchased a wilderness adventure bike, a Niner RLT 9 Steel with SRAM Force1 system. I changed the chainring from a 42t to a 38t and just love it. It is quiet, haven't missed a shift ever and it just plain works. And the disc brakes are also superb. I never had a SRAM equipped bike but this one is impressive.

I certainly don't understand why everyone bashes almost anything new that comes out. It's usually termed ugly or unnecessary. Most are happy to be riding the bike they bought in college. OK, being facetious. Almost every business and/or industry I know is continually trying new things. Some work, some don't. But the market will decide that. Also, it seems, many get a reputation for something they did long ago w/o considering that things can and do change. Anyway, I love all this new stuff even if I may never use it. There are some amazing bikes and products out there and more coming every day.

And last but not least, I have a Collegiate also, albeit a 3-sp. I use it mostly for my trips to the mailbox.

[curlybro]

Man you guys are a bunch of grumpy sram haters. I'd much rather shift a rear derailleur through an evenly spaced rear cassette to get to the gear I want than shift down one on the front derailleur and up 3x on the rear to get nearly the same feeling. It might not be a "new idea" but it is definitely a good one. I won't be buying one any time soon because I have no need and no extra cash but I can appreciate the utility of it.

[bfd]

That's just a bunch of marketing.

ive not had ghost shifting with a standard slant parallelogram rear derailleur and no one is copying this.

As already discussed, single chainrings were not a new thing. Neither are wide narrow cogs. New to cycling but wide narrow is also just one method of chain retention the isn't needed for a successful 1x bike. I've owned three, none of them have had a wide narrow ring. I've been riding 1x since about 2004.

SRAM added a 42t cog to the already existing 36t. Like I said, this was important to leading the 1x charge. Hats off to SRAM for that I guess.

Probably the most important part of the 1x puzzle was the clutch rear derailleur. 1x is possible without, but this is the most important part or reducing chain slap and chain loss.

Check out Shamano Capero. It's 1x and uses a shorted freehub body with cogs under 11t. Add a clutch (another shimano first) and you have all of the fundamental parts to a SRAM 1x group. The larger cogs are just refinements.

http://velo-kiev.at.ua/Shimano/40_02.jpg

That Capero crankset sure looks like the old Campy Croce d-aune:

http://www.cyclollector.com/2418-large_default/campagnolo-croce-d-aune-crankset.jpg

Good Luck!

[gdw]

Interesting product for riders who can't or don't want to run a front derailleur and need a wider gear range. I wonder how long the cassette, chain, and chairing will last before needing to be replaced? Hopefully longer than the 600-800 miles that some of the folks with 1x10 and 1x11 drivetrain are getting.

[NHAero]

Are those 600-800 miles lifetimes occurring due to chain angle? If not, is it due to the narrowness of the chain causing faster wear? What is driving this short lifetime?
And is the 1x12 going to fit on a 142mm hub?

Interesting product for riders who can't or don't want to run a front derailleur and need a wider gear range. I wonder how long the cassette, chain, and chairing will last before needing to be replaced? Hopefully longer than the 600-800 miles that some of the folks with 1x10 and 1x11 drivetrain are getting.

[gdw]

I don't know the cause. The riders who have complained about the wear are backpackers who used it on the Tour Divide and Colorado Trail.

[bicycletricycle]

i wonder what it would be like with a 50t front ring on a touring bike.

[benb]

I'm going to guess that was pretty extreme conditions with minimal or zero chance to clean the chain & lubricate it again.

[christian]

I think it's the massive torque you can apply with a 30-42 gear ratio.

[gdw]

That's true for some but several were just touring and not beating on themselves or gear like the racers. Ofcouncil runs 1x11 on his Pivot and posted that he starts replacing components, chain first, at 600 miles as preventive maintenance. His experience is probably more typical of the average rider.

[bicycletricycle]

the chain experiences the same amount of torque regardless of gearing.

I think

[CiclistiCliff]

I don't know the cause. The riders who have complained about the wear are backpackers who used it on the Tour Divide and Colorado Trail.

Chainline already is terrible. Chainring design wasn't optimal from the beginning (wolftooth has two revisions already, sram has revised their profile) and minimal chainwrap in the 10-26 ish caused premature cassette wear hence dead chains.

[Mark McM]

the chain experiences the same amount of torque regardless of gearing.

I think

Technically, the chain experiences mostly tension, but it does experience a little lateral bending moment (torque) if the chain line isn't straight.

The crank and chainring act as a lever, and the chain tension will be equal to the pedal force (perpendicular to the crank) times the ratio of the cranklength/chainring radius. Therefore, the smaller the chaining, the greater the tension for the same pedal force.

A few side notes about this:

The main reason that chain breakages are more common on MTBs is that the smaller chainrings generate larger chain tensions than typical of the bigger chainrings on road bikes.

Chain tension (which pulls forward on the sprockets/wheel) can be multiple times larger than the pedal force, so smaller chainrings also increase the likelihood of wheels being pulled out of horizontal dropouts. This is one of the reasons that vertical dropouts were adopted very early by MTBs - wheels just wouldn't stay in place on MTBs with horizontal dropouts.

[bicycletricycle]

is the tension applied to the chain effected by the overall gear ratio or just the chainring size?

[sitzmark]

Torque and ring size alone don't explain such shortened drive component life. Old school triples with 22/32/42 rings and 12-32 cogs didn't burn through chains, etc. in 600 miles (unless you just wanted fresh components). 22>32 is same ratio (1.4) as 34>50. Somewhat less extreme chainlines with multiple front rings.

Comparisons of 1x system life on Tour Divide need to be taken in relation to 2x and 3x systems in same environment to determine lifecycle differences. What were those experiencing? I ski/ride with a father/son team who rode the entire Tour Divide two (maybe 3 now) years ago. Going to ask them their set ups and component life. Toying with idea of mtb with 1x so interested in data.

[Tony]

Are those 600-800 miles lifetimes occurring due to chain angle? If not, is it due to the narrowness of the chain causing faster wear? What is driving this short lifetime?
And is the 1x12 going to fit on a 142mm hub?

The chain is slightly narrower than an 11-speed chain, and the pins on each link are completely flush. SRAM squeezed in that extra cog without needing to resort to a different driver body.

[GRAVELBIKE]

I spoke to a large bike brand's MTB marketing guy about trying to sell 2x-equipped "enthusiast-level" bikes, and he said that spec'ding a double was basically the kiss of death. Hell, many bikes won't even accept a front mech if you wanted to try and convert from 1x to 2x.

EVERYthing wears out more quickly when you ride off-road. There's no getting around it. A good percentage of riders will happily trade durability/longevity for chain security and simplicity.

And chainline? Here's a photo I took last year at SRAM's SLO facility:

https://40.media.tumblr.com/d9c074b08c3b489eed9fc6017ab66768/tumblr_nmiet18R1q1t37f6do1_540.jpg

[cp43]

I spoke to a large bike brand's MTB marketing guy about trying to sell 2x-equipped "enthusiast-level" bikes, and he said that spec'ding a double was basically the kiss of death. Hell, many bikes won't even accept a front mech if you wanted to try and convert from 1x to 2x.

EVERYthing wears out more quickly when you ride off-road. There's no getting around it. A good percentage of riders will happily trade durability/longevity for chain security and simplicity.

And chainline? Here's a photo I took last year at SRAM's SLO facility:



That photo, to my eye, makes it look like the chainring is outboard of the smallest cog. Am I seeing that correctly? Is that chainline representative of what you'd get on a real frame?

Thanks,

Chris

[GRAVELBIKE]

That photo, to my eye, makes it look like the chainring is outboard of the smallest cog. Am I seeing that correctly? Is that chainline representative of what you'd get on a real frame?

Thanks,

Chris

It's a test jig that moves the chainring outward until the chain drops off. They built it to test the efficacy of N/W chainrings (note the non-clutch rear mech). If memory serves, the chainline was out of spec by ~50mm before the chain derailed.

[cp43]

It's a test jig that moves the chainring outward until the chain drops off. They built it to test the efficacy of N/W chainrings (note the non-clutch rear mech). If memory serves, the chainline was out of spec by ~50mm before the chain derailed.

Thanks for the info, it all makes sense now! :beer:

[Mark McM]

is the tension applied to the chain effected by the overall gear ratio or just the chainring size?

For a give crank torque, the chain tension is dependent only on the chainring size. The crank/chainring is a mechanical lever, so the chain tension is related to the pedal force by the lengths of the lever arms (crank arm length/chainring radius).

All else being the same, the chain tension is inversely proportional to the chainring size, but the chain speed is proportional to chainring size. For example, if you the of the chainring decreases by half, the chain speed also decreases by half, but the chain tension doubles. Since power is force times speed, if the chain speed is cut in half but the chain tension (force) doubles, the total power transmitted by the chain remains the same.

At the rear wheel, the sprockets/wheel also are type of lever, so there is the same proportionality between lever arm lengths (radii) and the chain and wheel speeds and torques. At the ground contact point, the wheel has a faster speed but lower force than the chain, but the power transmission is equal.

[oldpotatoe]

for the shimano people-

http://www.oneupcomponents.com/collections/all-products/products/50t-shark-sprocket-18t-1x11

[thirdgenbird]

It's a test jig that moves the chainring outward until the chain drops off. They built it to test the efficacy of N/W chainrings (note the non-clutch rear mech). If memory serves, the chainline was out of spec by ~50mm before the chain derailed.

If this jig isn't on a shake table or similar, the lack of a clutch is not really relevant. Without bumps, I don't think you will notice the difference between high spring tension and a clutch. The force causing the chain to drop in this scenario is more similar to the lateral force applied by a front derailleur.

Regardless of above, it sounds like they have great retention with a poor chainline. I would like to know how it sounded before it finally climbed off.

[Tony]

for the shimano people-

http://www.oneupcomponents.com/collections/all-products/products/50t-shark-sprocket-18t-1x11

A review on the Oneup Shark
http://www.pinkbike.com/news/oneup-shark-50t-sprocket-kit-review.html

[needmobikes]

Not sold on it. I'm happy with my 1x10 and leg power.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[Tony]

Not sold on it. I'm happy with my 1x10 and leg power.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

.....contentment is great gain!

[unterhausen]

anyone else remember the Shimano eagle? Put a lot of those on Schwinn Varsities BITD

[thirdgenbird]

anyone else remember the Shimano eagle? Put a lot of those on Schwinn Varsities BITD

I wonder which one I more durable

http://www.disraeligears.co.uk/Site/Shimano_Eagle_derailleur_%281st_style%29_files/IMGP3139-filtered.jpg

[AJosiahK]

I'll try it

Still seems like big jumps between cogs .... Not a fan of that

Or having to grab new shifter mech cass set...

Well see I guess

[sitzmark]

...

Comparisons of 1x system life on Tour Divide need to be taken in relation to 2x and 3x systems in same environment to determine lifecycle differences. What were those experiencing? I ski/ride with a father/son team who rode the entire Tour Divide two (maybe 3 now) years ago. Going to ask them their set ups and component life. Toying with idea of mtb with 1x so interested in data.

So, I skied with Peter http://bethelcitizen.com/archives/1311 today and asked about drivetrain wear on tour divide. He rode 3x and his son rode 2x - yes indeed chain life was 600 miles at best. Front rings lasted the distance but chains and cassettes were chewed up fast. Made plans for enough chains, but Peter said he limped into one check point with only two functional cogs. They had to make special arrangements for extra cassettes.

Have no point of reference for 1x front ring wear, but sounds like the chain/cassette wear between 1x, 2x, 3x was similar.