Shimano GRX

[hummus_aquinas]

Anyone see the new shimano GRX group? Like many of their new groups I'll hate the way it looks until it eventually grows on me. Interesting that one of the groups is 10 speed but I think I'm for it; less accuracy required on hanger alignment, makes sense for rough use.

https://gravel.shimano.com/en/components/

https://bikerumor.com/2019/05/07/shimano-grx-component-series-first-dedicated-to-gravel-w-10-11-speed-options/

https://bikerumor-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/GRAVEL_group_11_SW.jpg

[Zee]

Well done on getting this posted but very weird to see a BRAND new 10 speed group in the RX400 line.

[jtbadge]

They claim a lot of cross compatibility with existing road groups, but I'm curious if the 10 speed stuff is compatible with just the 4700 shift cable pull, or everything else in 10 speed road.

46-30t crank option is great.

Dropper post capability on the left levers when running 1x11 is also great.

[Blown Reek]

It looks like there are 11 cogs in that cassette.

[jtbadge]

It looks like there are 11 cogs in that cassette.

Did you click either of the links? There are new 10 and 11 speed groups.

[PaMtbRider]

Other than 46-30 crank set I don't see much here to get excited about. This looks more like a marketing exercise than a new group intro.

[Blown Reek]

Did you click either of the links? There are new 10 and 11 speed groups.

No, I counted the cassette. Then I Google'd up "Shimano GRX" and the picture was the same.

Seeing how I can't be bothered with anything gravel and the last time I was on 10-speed was when 10-speed was the new 9-speed, 2x10 compatibility is irrelevant to me.


Other than 46-30 crank set I don't see much here to get excited about. This looks more like a marketing exercise than a new group intro.

This.

[Mark McM]

Other than 46-30 crank set I don't see much here to get excited about. This looks more like a marketing exercise than a new group intro.

And, as I predicted, not only new chainring BCDs, but also an increase in chainline & Q factor.

But wait - these new cranks and front derailleur have a maximum chainring differential of 17 teeth. Didn't SRAM assure that this was imposslble, which is why their new AXS drivetrain only has a maximum chainring differential of 13 teeth? (Or maybe SRAM still doesn't know how to get front derailleurs work well.)

[GOTHBROOKS]

hydraulic crosstops are cool but id never use them.

[Safepants]

They claim a lot of cross compatibility with existing road groups, but I'm curious if the 10 speed stuff is compatible with just the 4700 shift cable pull, or everything else in 10 speed road.

46-30t crank option is great.

Dropper post capability on the left levers when running 1x11 is also great.

it claims compatibility with existing 10s road dual control levers. I'd probably be most interested in getting this clutch RD myself and use on my existing 10speed gear. Replacing my older Tiagra non clutch seems like a no brainer for off road. My chainstay will thank me hahaha

[weaponsgrade]

The key things for me are the lower gearing options. Finally, there's something lower than a 50/34 and 11-34 that's available officially. Everything else is a distant second. For sure there are some things I don't like - wider Q factor especially, but those gearing options are enough for me to give some serious consideration.

[David Tollefson]

I like the in-line brake levers. At least I like the idea -- I've never used them. Not so sure about the now effectively-longer brake lever bodies. Or the 30T minimum chainring. I'd like to see that down to 28 or 26T. But with their choice of a new bolt pattern, maybe that's all they can do. I only read the GravelCyclist article, but I didn't see which BB shell width this was designed to -- maybe they're achieving the +2.5mm chain line by going to a 73mm shell and a longer spindle on the cranks...

[jtbadge]

it claims compatibility with existing 10s road dual control levers. I'd probably be most interested in getting this clutch RD myself and use on my existing 10speed gear. Replacing my older Tiagra non clutch seems like a no brainer for off road. My chainstay will thank me hahaha

Point is, there are two completely incompatible sets of "existing 10s road dual control levers" - 4700 and everything else 10 speed. These derailleurs can't work with both.

[BikeNY]

Here is another overview:

https://bikepacking.com/news/shimano-grx/

I think it's pretty cool that Shimano went through the effort to make this, and it sounds like some of the innovations are for real.

I think the brake lever redesign is worth mentioning. The moved the pivot for the brake levers up by 18mm for better braking from the hoods and a more secure grip up there.

46-30 chainrings should be well received as well.

[geordanh]

Yeah this is super cool. My Di2 Hylex hack job is past due for replacement.

I think the brake lever redesign is huge. more leverage from the hoods is big for riding single track on a drop bar bike. Very pumped about the cross top levers as well. Gonna need drop bars to go even wider now just like mtb.

Do you guys know if the increase in q factor is on both sides of the crank arm? ie did they push out the chainline/increase q so that there's more room for fat tires and short stays vs just making the crank arms thicker/wider?

My 2021 dream gravel bike getting closer to being a reality:

wide ass bars with cross top levers
50mm ocho fork
29x2 tire clearance
short chain stays
long reach frame
short stem

Like others wish they'd gone 12s with 11-46. Oh well. They've gotta leave some stuff on the roadmap for three years from now I guess.

[yinzerniner]

Here is another overview:

https://bikepacking.com/news/shimano-grx/

I think it's pretty cool that Shimano went through the effort to make this, and it sounds like some of the innovations are for real.

I think the brake lever redesign is worth mentioning. The moved the pivot for the brake levers up by 18mm for better braking from the hoods and a more secure grip up there.

46-30 chainrings should be well received as well.

Totally agree about the pivot point - better leverage, more natural one-finger braking point, more textured hoods for hopefully a more secure hold.

As for the other changes - seems like this groupsets aimed more towards the OEM crowd. The offset at the FD and cranks seems like a natural progression to fit fat tires / wide chainstays. If the large 17t jumps are as smooth as the 16t jumps getting the gearing right should be a breeze.

The groups as a whole are pretty ugly though with the press shots and renders. At least in the real world pics they are... equally ugly.
https://cyclingtips.com/2019/05/shimano-grx-gravel-groupset-release-info-weights/

[Sjambok]

Those hoods are quite ugly. Given that I am very curious how the braking is for smaller handed individuals on single track. I wonder if moving the pivot is more marketing or actual performance increase.

[d_douglas]

I think it looks great! Very practical stuff, but then again, I defer to others on details like chainlines and pivot points :)!!

[Mark McM]

Or the 30T minimum chainring. I'd like to see that down to 28 or 26T. But with their choice of a new bolt pattern, maybe that's all they can do.

According to the BikeRumor article, the BCDs are 110mm/80mm. SRAM has a 120mm/80mm 4 arm crank that has a standard 39t/26t combination (and 74mm BCD fits chainrings down to 24t), so it is likely that a 28t or even a 26t chainring could be fit to the GRX crank. Perhaps an aftermarket chainring manufacturer will make smaller chainrings for this crank (are you listening TA and Stronglight?)

[Ken Robb]

[QUOTE=

wide ass bars with cross top levers
50mm ocho fork
29x2 tire clearance
short chain stays
long reach frame
short stem

Like others wish they'd gone 12s with 11-46. Oh well. They've gotta leave some stuff on the roadmap for three years from now I guess.[/QUOTE]
Why are short chain stays desirable for you?

[geordanh]

taking the thread off track a bit, but longer reach frames have done wonders for mtb and think for what so many people are using gravel bikes for (borderline mtb stuff) plus loading up the bars with bags etc, designing these bikes around short stems is the future. Short chain stays keeps bike from feeling like a boat if you're stretching top tubes.

[AngryScientist]

I am happy to see the new sub compact crank options!

[dddd]

Wow, the cross-top hydraulic aux levers that I have been clamoring for just became reality!

The added 2.5mm of chainline I assume just goes along with committed use of disc-standard 135mm rear spacing, but if it were my build and I didn't need such low gearing or added tire clearance, I would probably use one of the older (130/135mm) chainline model cranks together with the 135mm rear spacing.

The derailer actuation is obviously of the new geometry as used on 11s (and on 10s Tiagra). This makes for less-finicky cable performance requirements so fits in with the lower quality level (cheaper cables and unsealed ferrules) and with rougher conditions and/or extended maintenance intervals.

By hitting a lower price point with so much in the way of features, soon there might be a lot more mountain bikers getting out onto the road and "gravel" (rougher roads) rides.
I could see a lot of mtb riders who have expensive mtb's willing to shell out for a gravel bike now, but only if the price were tempting.
It seems like a good strategy, as Shimano might be selling them a better gruppo later if it turns out they like using drop handlebars and decide to upgrade to a better gravel bike.

[charliedid]

Yeah bike parts!

[zennmotion]

I like the in-line brake levers. At least I like the idea -- I've never used them.

In-line levers were a thing for a few years with CX. And then they weren't. They might be nice for people who rarely ride in the drops as they offer better leverage for extended braking to reduce hand fatigue. On the other hand I found that I didn't like moving my hands inboard to use them at the worst times, like sketchy fast gravel descents when wider is much better for control. There's nothing new under the sun...

[Mark McM]

In-line levers were a thing for a few years with CX. And then they weren't.

That may speak more of availability then demand. In-line levers weren't a thing in CX, because they originally didn't exist. Then somebody invented in-line mechanical cable levers, and then they were a thing. Then CX largely switched to hydraulic (disc) brakes, and there weren't any hydraulic in-line levers, so weren't a thing again. Now that there are hydraulic in-line levers, maybe they'll be a thing again.

[Safepants]

Point is, there are two completely incompatible sets of "existing 10s road dual control levers" - 4700 and everything else 10 speed. These derailleurs can't work with both.

ugh, i forgot about that. I have 4600 RD currently, and 5600 shifters, i should be good to upgrade the rear mech right?

[geordanh]

In-line levers were a thing for a few years with CX. And then they weren't. They might be nice for people who rarely ride in the drops as they offer better leverage for extended braking to reduce hand fatigue. On the other hand I found that I didn't like moving my hands inboard to use them at the worst times, like sketchy fast gravel descents when wider is much better for control. There's nothing new under the sun...



Yeah to me fast gravel you’re in the drops for control. The cross tops are when you’re trying to get your weight as far back as you can on something steep like a trail feature


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gummee]

That may speak more of availability then demand. In-line levers weren't a thing in CX, because they originally didn't exist. Then somebody invented in-line mechanical cable levers, and then they were a thing. Then CX largely switched to hydraulic (disc) brakes, and there weren't any hydraulic in-line levers, so weren't a thing again. Now that there are hydraulic in-line levers, maybe they'll be a thing again.

There will always be a few that insist on having inline levers.

I like the mix-n-match with Ultegra since I just bought 2 RX800 rear derailleurs.

After last weekend's Devil's Backbone ride, I may spring for a crank with a smaller small ring. ...but all that does is make me slower, so maybe not. Dunno.

I'm tempted to try a 36t mtn bike 11sp cassette on the wheelset I rode last weekend (2 weekends ago?!) Cub Creek is an SOB at the top @ 22%! The rest of the time, I'm good with a 28t big cog

M

[Gummee]

ugh, i forgot about that. I have 4600 RD currently, and 5600 shifters, i should be good to upgrade the rear mech right?

I don't think so. New 10sp Tiagra only seems to work with new 10sp Tiagra

You can always run any Shimano mtn bike derailleur up to 9sp with that setup if you need bigger (physically) gears. I kept a 9sp Shadow rear derailleur around for a while for that very reason.

M

[David Tollefson]

According to the BikeRumor article, the BCDs are 110mm/80mm. SRAM has a 120mm/80mm 4 arm crank that has a standard 39t/26t combination (and 74mm BCD fits chainrings down to 24t), so it is likely that a 28t or even a 26t chainring could be fit to the GRX crank. Perhaps an aftermarket chainring manufacturer will make smaller chainrings for this crank (are you listening TA and Stronglight?)

Yup, I've got a SRAM X5 crank waiting on the next build, 42/26.

[LGrider]

Happy to see this. If it had been around a year ago I'd have the 48x31 crank and 11-30 cassette instead of the standard Ultegra 50x34 and 11-32. The 11 tooth cog still wouldn't get much use even with a 48 tooth chainring. 12-29 would have been perfect.

[jfranci3]

Those RX810 shifters look like the RS500 / 105 5800 shifters, which looked horrible but felt good.


I like the looks of the GX cranks. I was looking at cheap SRAM PM options, realizing that it winds up being $200 more than Shimano. Shimano cranks are ugly and I would needed new rings. At least cranks look better.

[bigbill]

I like the crankset. The only thing I'd change about my gravel setup is to replace the 36 with a 34 on the crankset. 34/46 seems more useful. Otherwise, my R8000 derailleurs, 685 levers, and 785 calipers have been flawless on all kinds of surfaces including single track.

[John H.]

Need more cassettes.
Shimano needs to make Ultegra/XT level 11-36 and also XTR level 11-36 in 11 speed.

[jtbadge]

Need more cassettes.
Shimano needs to make Ultegra/XT level 11-36 and also XTR level 11-36 in 11 speed.

SRAM 11 speed 11-36 works great with Shimano, as long as you don’t need it to fit a 10 speed freehub body.

[eddief]

just picked up a new Specialized Roubaix Di2 and had installed an Sram 11-36 cassette with a Praxis Zyante 48-32 crankset. Shifts perfectly. I was afraid the braze front derailleur tab would not allow the front d to mount low enough. It sits a bit more than 2mm above the outer ring, but still shifts perfectly.

SRAM 11 speed 11-36 works great with Shimano, as long as you don’t need it to fit a 10 speed freehub body.

[John H.]

The SRAM cassette does work ok, but it is pretty porky.


SRAM 11 speed 11-36 works great with Shimano, as long as you don’t need it to fit a 10 speed freehub body.

[marciero]

Am liking. Here we have a bona-fide road-ish subcompact group coming stock with 30t ring and can likely fit smaller. If I were building up a new gravel or camping bike I might consider this. I dont mind higher Q so much for these applications. Am currently stuck in 10sp land, so I am also encouraged by what this says for future availability of wide-gear 10sp cassettes. I dont find the group ugly, though I would not put that shadowy thing on my road or rando bikes.

[Gummee]

Am liking. Here we have a bona-fide road-ish subcompact group coming stock with 30t ring and can likely fit smaller. If I were building up a new gravel or camping bike I might consider this. I dont mind higher Q so much for these applications. Am currently stuck in 10sp land, so I am also encouraged by what this says for future availability of wide-gear 10sp cassettes. I dont find the group ugly, though I would not put that shadowy thing on my road or rando bikes.

Most of the bikes these parts are aimed at have a 12x142 rear axle, Moving things out 2.5mm is just an adjustment for the wider rear.

M

[David Tollefson]

Most of the bikes these parts are aimed at have a 12x142 rear axle, Moving things out 2.5mm is just an adjustment for the wider rear.

M

The 142 axle does NOT move the cassette outboard relative to a 135 qr axle at all. That extra 7mm represents 3.5mm each side protruding into the dropout slot. The inside face (not the slot) span of the dropouts still remains at 135mm.

[scharny]

SRAM 11 speed 11-36 works great with Shimano, as long as you don’t need it to fit a 10 speed freehub body.

I'm running one with an RX rear derailleur and a 46/30 FSA Energy Modular BB386EVO Adventure Crankset up front and it works well. R8000 rear derailleur was not so good.

[jdp211]

Most of the bikes these parts are aimed at have a 12x142 rear axle, Moving things out 2.5mm is just an adjustment for the wider rear.

M

Its also plainly stated that the 2.5mm adjustment is for wider tires and short chainstays

[dddd]

Its also plainly stated that the 2.5mm adjustment is for wider tires and short chainstays

Wider tires and shorter chainstays both compete for the same space as the chainrings, so in order to maintain frame structure there are limits to these constraints as well as chainring count and Q.
Some frames are curving/moving the chainstay below this interference zone in order to push what the space will allow.

A 2.5mm increase in chainline equals 5mm increase in symmetrical Q, which sort of reflects the increase from traditional 130mm Road to 135mm Disc/Gravel, yet road cranks have by now already been designed to accomodate 135mm in back. So the difference would seem to be only in part due to the fact that 100% of the Gravel bikes will have the larger rear axle spacing (no 130mm).

I suspect it is always going to be the case that the majority of gravel bikes end up having more space for tires than most owners will actually use, so if shopping for a gravel bike I might look for the one that can better use a crankset with current Road chainline dimension (since I never experience cross-chaining toward the small-small while riding, only toward the big-big).

[Mark McM]

The 142 axle does NOT move the cassette outboard relative to a 135 qr axle at all. That extra 7mm represents 3.5mm each side protruding into the dropout slot. The inside face (not the slot) span of the dropouts still remains at 135mm.

But the 135mm axle does move the cassette outboard by 2.5mm relative to a 130mm axle (standard road axle). Some other road cranks have also increased the chainline a bit to accommodate this (such as Campagnolo HO cranks). But as mentioned above, the chainline increase for GRX was more about chainstay clearance for wide tires/short chainstays, and being able to accommodate 1x chainlines was probably also a factor.

[jtbadge]

The SRAM cassette does work ok, but it is pretty porky.

Eh, the 1170 version is only like 20 or 30g heavier than the 11-34 Ultegra.

I'm running one with an RX rear derailleur and a 46/30 FSA Energy Modular BB386EVO Adventure Crankset up front and it works well. R8000 rear derailleur was not so good.

Weird that it didn't work with the R8000. I (and some other members of the forum) have used them with the plain ol' 6800 RD with great results.

[Jaybee]

I think there is a lot to like here. The really nice things that I will probably take advantage of over the next year:

1)46-30 crankset that doesn't cost $400+ dollars

2)11-speed mechanical RD that can handle a 42t big cog and interface with road shifters without a TanPan or other cable-pull modification device.

[Clean39T]

Yeah to me fast gravel you’re in the drops for control. The cross tops are when you’re trying to get your weight as far back as you can on something steep like a trail feature



But who can ride a trail "feature" with their hands 5cm from the stem?

Fixie kids, but that's about it.


The ergonomics of gravel-bikes as XC mountain-bikes makes no sense. Trying to hold onto hoods on technical terrain is just silly and bad for your body (hands, wrists, etc.). And being in the drops on technical terrain just puts too much weight forward - unless your drops are level with your saddle and super wide, at which point, why even have drop bars?

My $0.02 is gravel bikes need to stay on gravel, and race organizers need to resist the urge to make people ride singletrack and rough mtb stuff on these bikes.

[dddd]

But who can ride a trail "feature" with their hands 5cm from the stem?

Fixie kids, but that's about it.


The ergonomics of gravel-bikes as XC mountain-bikes makes no sense. Trying to hold onto hoods on technical terrain is just silly and bad for your body (hands, wrists, etc.). And being in the drops on technical terrain just puts too much weight forward - unless your drops are level with your saddle and super wide, at which point, why even have drop bars?

My $0.02 is gravel bikes need to stay on gravel, and race organizers need to resist the urge to make people ride singletrack and rough mtb stuff on these bikes.


I think that there is always going to be some significant variation of how technical that Gravel-race courses will be, and riders need to be ready to judge their abilities carefully just as when road racing out of the hills. Just as Cyclocross courses can get gnarly and force decisions as to whether a dismount is worthwhile or necessary in terms of risks.

We haven't seen those new Shimano levers on bikes yet, so I'll wait to see how good of a job they did with putting the actual levers where they need to be. And the location of any step-down of diameter at the bar tops can be as important as the bar shape itself!
5cm is two inches, and even my very old Dia Comp auxiliary levers managed far better than that on a 39cm Randonneur bar (that was even much narrower up top).

True enough though that a flat bar is going to work better for aggressive riding off road, even if today's bar widths have seemingly gone beyond reason. Did no one think about how much more difficult it can be for trail users to pass one another on narrow trails as bar widths went from 58cm to what, 80cm?

I really can't quite imagine Eli Tomac riding his KX450 with drop bars for what that's worth! :eek:
One of the 250 riders who was at Saturday's Las Vegas final to claim his championship merely bent his bars and then found himself getting passed by the entire field, losing his hard-earned championship.
Blame the track though, seemingly designed to throw in a wild card.

[FlashUNC]

But who can ride a trail "feature" with their hands 5cm from the stem?

Fixie kids, but that's about it.


The ergonomics of gravel-bikes as XC mountain-bikes makes no sense. Trying to hold onto hoods on technical terrain is just silly and bad for your body (hands, wrists, etc.). And being in the drops on technical terrain just puts too much weight forward - unless your drops are level with your saddle and super wide, at which point, why even have drop bars?

My $0.02 is gravel bikes need to stay on gravel, and race organizers need to resist the urge to make people ride singletrack and rough mtb stuff on these bikes.

I do wonder how much of the gravel thing is people just not wanting to buy a hardtail mountain bike.

Is the country really covered in that many unpaved fire roads?

[hummus_aquinas]

Did no one think about how much more difficult it can be for trail users to pass one another on narrow trails as bar widths went from 58cm to what, 80cm?


Uh yeah, that'll be the day...
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51358d51e4b0f7335636ca84/59f8eec5ec212db45a26ee74/59f8eec624a694907ebaf4dc/1509486298476/Andrew+-+Crust+-leather-bar-+leh+cycling+custom+leather+bar+tape.+-2.jpg?format=2500w

[saab2000]

I do wonder how much of the gravel thing is people just not wanting to buy a hardtail mountain bike.

Is the country really covered in that many unpaved fire roads?

Well, for about another 7 weeks I’ll be living in Michigan. Lots of unpaved roads and people seek them out because there’s literally 95% less traffic. And the traffic there is is much more sane and less aggressive.

It’s not MTB terrain. No real need for a dedicated bike beyond wide-ish tires. So my regular road bike will work, but it’s not ideal. I’m using 38mm tires and they’re about ride for the soft sections where I ride.

[dddd]

Uh yeah, that'll be the day...
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51358d51e4b0f7335636ca84/59f8eec5ec212db45a26ee74/59f8eec624a694907ebaf4dc/1509486298476/Andrew+-+Crust+-leather-bar-+leh+cycling+custom+leather+bar+tape.+-2.jpg?format=2500w

Components hall-of-shame to whoever designed that ubiquitous cable housing noodle with the sharp bend in it...
...and to the company that made twenty million of them, ...and to the many bike companies that spec'd such a crappy part.
And yet it's hard to find a good one, all of these years on(?).

Those bars look like 48's? Certainly the camera lens is boosting them a bit, but I get the idea.
More for stabilizing a heavy front rack load than for off-roading in this case though.

[geordanh]

My $0.02 is gravel bikes need to stay on gravel, and race organizers need to resist the urge to make people ride singletrack and rough mtb stuff on these bikes.

But that's what makes things fun and interesting! And I'd say that's where things are going, especially as the lines between all these bikes blur and you can start to do a lot of different types of riding on them. Combining a mix of road sections, gravel, and technical riding means you need a bit of everything, endurance, raw power, biking handling, mental stamina. Unfortunately I have none of those things so got murdered at our local race last weekend that was a perfect mix of distance, tech stuff road and gravel.

[Mark McM]

Components hall-of-shame to whoever designed that ubiquitous cable housing noodle with the sharp bend in it...
...and to the company that made twenty million of them, ...and to the many bike companies that spec'd such a crappy part.
And yet it's hard to find a good one, all of these years on(?).

Yet one more good reason for fork crown mounted cable hangers - the cable enters vertically, after taking a wide arc from the handlebars to the hanger.

[KonaSS]

I do wonder how much of the gravel thing is people just not wanting to buy a hardtail mountain bike.

Is the country really covered in that many unpaved fire roads?

I just finished a 2 day race this last weekend. Each day was 100 miles, 90 plus percent of it was gravel. It was a blast!

[Clean39T]

But that's what makes things fun and interesting! And I'd say that's where things are going, especially as the lines between all these bikes blur and you can start to do a lot of different types of riding on them. Combining a mix of road sections, gravel, and technical riding means you need a bit of everything, endurance, raw power, biking handling, mental stamina. Unfortunately I have none of those things so got murdered at our local race last weekend that was a perfect mix of distance, tech stuff road and gravel.

I think I'm getting old and my sense of what constitutes a fun "adventure" is changing.. I just want to ride my bike in beautiful places. Being "extreme" is not high on my list of to-dos. YMMV.

And since I'm old and not hucking my road bike off drops, or riding it through rock gardens, I'll stick with Campy road bits :)

[saab2000]

I think I'm getting old and my sense of what constitutes a fun "adventure" is changing.. I just want to ride my bike in beautiful places. Being "extreme" is not high on my list of to-dos. YMMV.

And since I'm old and not hucking my road bike off drops, or riding it through rock gardens, I'll stick with Campy road bits :)

I'm not looking for extreme adventure either and unpaved roads are enough for me. Not looking for single-track on my road bike.

To my eyes the biggest thing of this new groupset is the smaller chainrings. The rest is fluff and a bit of window dressing to differentiate this from other groups.

I need to get a group for my all-road Zanconato, which is plumbed for Di2 or EPS. It can't go mechanical, something I sort of regret speccing at this point. But so be it.

This Shimano groupset will for sure be on my short list when it becomes available and there's a very good chance this is what I'll end up with.

[jdp211]

Is the country really covered in that many unpaved fire roads?

Yes. They're everywhere

[dem]

Yes. They're everywhere

Yup: "According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in 2012 there were 1,357,430 miles of unpaved road in the United States, accounting for almost 35 percent of the more than 4 million miles of roadway in the Nation"

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/training/fhwasa14094/

I'm interested in the shifters (but not at $400!) because I do tend to brake from the hoods and my hands cramp up on really long descents.

And getting more subcompact adoption is great all around. 46/30 with a wide range cassette is probably what "normal" people should be riding even on the road.

[thirdgenbird]

I kind of want to convert an old road bike to a 1x10 commuter using this drivetrain and a 10spd dura ace downtube shifter (if compatible)

[jc031699]

Reminds me a lot of old Shimano OEM strategy with RX100 and endless different Exage and Deore groups. Mix and match, plug and play, differentiate the price points.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jsafran]

Is no one else disappointed that a new groupset from Shimano is not 12-speed?

I guess I am somewhat relieved because I have slowly been piecing together an R8020 replacement for my Traildonkey with RS-685/Ultegra that I finally am installing this upcoming weekend. At this point I will need a new groupset again before Shimano 12-speed road is not only announced, but actually able to be purchased.

[Bentley]

So my question is where does this fit in the hierarchy? I assume below 105, but it would seem like they would have created a group that had a tie to one of the more elite groups. I mean they have a clutch derailleur for Ultegra, so why not just add a few more bits at that level and call it a day?

Ray

[dddd]

Campag, SRAM and Shimano are able to offer less costly gruppos in part by using earlier gear counts, so this one would seem to be a good example of that.

Looking at their part series numbers tells one where in the price-point hierarchy that the pieces are slotted in.

I believe the lower gear count helps with the price by reducing the tolerance requirements as well as by getting more mileage out of older tooling and facilities.

At this user's level, I am finding 9s equipment to be versatile and economical, mainly because the ever-changing grade of my local roads doesn't much require any 1-tooth gear shifts to remain efficient.
So 9s MTB cassetes having 12-34t gear spread work out perfectly with my gravel wheels/tires and compact (50-34t) crankset.
Going back decades, I found the same to be true when racing cyclocross, as I was one of the few who used an 8s mtb cassette as it was ideal for the near-constant accelerations of cx. I stole countless holeshot starts simply because I wasn't having to shift as often.

[scharny]

Originally Posted by scharny View Post
I'm running one with an RX rear derailleur and a 46/30 FSA Energy Modular BB386EVO Adventure Crankset up front and it works well. R8000 rear derailleur was not so good.
Weird that it didn't work with the R8000. I (and some other members of the forum) have used them with the plain ol' 6800 RD with great results.
Sorry that was a bit misleading. I meant that the RX definitely feels more solid on the upper range than the R8000, especially in the crossring (i.e. big ring up front largest in back). It did work OK though.

[simplemind]

I am running the Shimano Ultegra RS685 (https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/ultegra-6800/ST-RS685-L.html) mechanical hydraulic shifters mated to M7000 SLX derailleurs. Not seeing the difference.

[Jaybee]

I am running the Shimano Ultegra RS685 (https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/product/component/ultegra-6800/ST-RS685-L.html) mechanical hydraulic shifters mated to M7000 SLX derailleurs. Not seeing the difference.

Don’t you need a tanpan or shift mate to make the rear work? And I’ve seen no solution for Shimano road shifters mated to front derailleurs. Your setup sounds cool, how does it work?

[simplemind]

Don’t you need a tanpan or shift mate to make the rear work? And I’ve seen no solution for Shimano road shifters mated to front derailleurs. Your setup sounds cool, how does it work?

No tanpan, and stock SLX components. Really works well. It's probably geared a bit too low, but thats easy to correct.

Just got back from some wet gravel and here is my SLX system running a 10-42 SRAM XX1 cassette. The XX1 doesn't shift as quick in the middle gears as my SLX 11-42, which has flawless shifting.

https://i.imgur.com/8GELX2h.jpg


I run a 2x, although this is really overkill with a 10x42 cassette.


https://i.imgur.com/tt3Epox.jpg

[TheseGoTo11]

Don’t you need a tanpan or shift mate to make the rear work? And I’ve seen no solution for Shimano road shifters mated to front derailleurs. Your setup sounds cool, how does it work?

Shiftmate 7 allows Shimano road shifters to mate with MTB front derailleurs. I've got 6700 levers operating XT FDs on two bikes with this...works a peach.

[TheseGoTo11]

My two cents...if I was going to run 11 speed Shimano on a gravel bike, I think I'd prefer a 6800/R8000 crankset with 46/34 rings combined with an XT 11-40 cassette, gearing wise. Even if it means using a Road Link or MTB RD, that would mitigate the big drop between rings on the front. IME, two tooth cassette jumps are less of an issue as rings get smaller. I've been running 48/34 up front with an 11-34 cassette on my road bike for over a year. I don't ever think about it.

[XXtwindad]

It looks like the RX812 can handle a 42t cassette. Don't have to worry about using a Wolf Tooth, etc. What's not to like about that? Wonder what took Shimano so long.

I do find the marketing a little disingenuous, if understandable. They really can't market the new components as "this will really help get your ass up a steep hill." So they call it "gravel."

I have no intentions of using one of my "gravel" bikes for actual gravel or dirt.

[efixler]

I do wonder how much of the gravel thing is people just not wanting to buy a hardtail mountain bike.

Is the country really covered in that many unpaved fire roads?

For me, it's more about wanting to be able to ride the whole ride, which feels more possible/enjoyable on a bike with a little more road zip, at the expense of of some technical capability.

'Gravel' is a bit of a silly word, but whether you're riding a gravel bike/rando bike/hardtail/whatever, versatile multi-surface riding is really fun.

[rePhil]

There is some info on the velo news podcast with some Shimano guys that among other things addresse's Why 11 and not 12.

https://www.velonews.com/2019/05/news/tech-podcast-the-skinny-on-shimano-grx-drivetrain_493384

[Safepants]

Campag, SRAM and Shimano are able to offer less costly gruppos in part by using earlier gear counts, so this one would seem to be a good example of that.

Looking at their part series numbers tells one where in the price-point hierarchy that the pieces are slotted in.

I believe the lower gear count helps with the price by reducing the tolerance requirements as well as by getting more mileage out of older tooling and facilities.

At this user's level, I am finding 9s equipment to be versatile and economical, mainly because the ever-changing grade of my local roads doesn't much require any 1-tooth gear shifts to remain efficient.
So 9s MTB cassetes having 12-34t gear spread work out perfectly with my gravel wheels/tires and compact (50-34t) crankset.
Going back decades, I found the same to be true when racing cyclocross, as I was one of the few who used an 8s mtb cassette as it was ideal for the near-constant accelerations of cx. I stole countless holeshot starts simply because I wasn't having to shift as often.

I'm a big fan of the 12-36 9 speed on my commuter and my "gravel/monstercross" bike. The deore shadow rear derailleur is rated to handle the 36t ok. I have the dura-ace 9 speed bar ends shifters on two of my bikes. One has a triple 53/39/30 Sugino crankset, the other is an older Tiagra 4500 50/39/30 (found a 50t 130bcd ring).

The bar end shifters are great for dumping down the whole cassette after cresting a hill, or accelerating after a stop light.

[Bostic]

Is the Sugino 901 crank still the narrowest q-factor at 145mm?

[Mark McM]

Is the Sugino 901 crank still the narrowest q-factor at 145mm?

Still? It never was. Campagnolo Nuovo Record was about 135mm, and many other cranks of this era were also quite narrow.

Now that we've moved to external bearing BBs and pressfit BB shells, there are still a few narrow cranks, but these tend to be boutique cranks (like the Extralite QRC-2, at 139mm).

Another factor consider for crank width is U factor - the width of the cranks at the BB spindle. For duck-footed riders (like me), this can be just as important. Campagnolo has maintained a very narrow U factor in their cranks at just 128mm (Q factor 145.5mm). I've used the Sugino OX901 cranks, and they definitely have a wider U factor than Campagnolo cranks.

SRAM claims their Red cranks have a Q factor of 146mm, but this is a bit of a fudge. The width between pedal flats is 146mm, but the pedal flats are inset by 1.5mm, so the width at the surface of the crank is really 149mm.

[NHAero]

When they rate the RX810 rear derailleur for 2X set-ups with up to a 11-34 cassette, and the RX812 for 1X set-ups and up to an 11-42 cassette, are we guessing that the cassette max cog size is a function more of total tooth differential, and ability to wrap chain? And that the RX812 will shift an 11-42 cassette just fine?

[XXtwindad]

When they rate the RX810 rear derailleur for 2X set-ups with up to a 11-34 cassette, and the RX812 for 1X set-ups and up to an 11-42 cassette, are we guessing that the cassette max cog size is a function more of total tooth differential, and ability to wrap chain? And that the RX812 will shift an 11-42 cassette just fine?

That's what Shimano told me earlier today.

[merlinmurph]

The ergonomics of gravel-bikes as XC mountain-bikes makes no sense. Trying to hold onto hoods on technical terrain is just silly and bad for your body (hands, wrists, etc.). And being in the drops on technical terrain just puts too much weight forward - unless your drops are level with your saddle and super wide, at which point, why even have drop bars?

My $0.02 is gravel bikes need to stay on gravel, and race organizers need to resist the urge to make people ride singletrack and rough mtb stuff on these bikes.


I do wonder how much of the gravel thing is people just not wanting to buy a hardtail mountain bike.

Is the country really covered in that many unpaved fire roads?


Well, there's a wide range of "gravel", just like there is a large range of mt bikes. Some gravel (I hate that word...) bikes are essentially road bikes with extra clearance for 32mm tires, while others are more robust and can handle tires ~50mm. Like any other bike, pick the one that is right for the riding you want to do.

Personally, I can go out my door and ride miles of dirt, very very little of it actually maintained dirt roads. It's mostly singletrack (think novice+ mtb trails) with the occasional very rocky/rooty section - hey, this is New England after all. I avoid the continuous technical sections because it just isn't fun, but the rest of the stuff is a ball with the right tires (40mm anyway, but I'm old). Occasionally, I'll go up to VT and NH to ride the dirt roads there, and invariably end up on a snowmobile/4WD trail that can get a bit rough. All fun stuff and I prefer having a gravel bike to a chunky mtb.

My point is that "gravel" isn't just dirt roads, at least to a lot of people.

Back to the GRX group...... I wish Shimano had given options for lower gearing. Yes, there are other options, but Shimano should see the need. Over at RKP, Patrick had a conversation with a Shimano rep who said something like “If you ever need gearing lower than 30-34, maybe you should be on a mt bike”. Sorry, but I strongly disagree with that. A lot of these rides have grades that are 20+%, and when you hit one of those near the end of a long day, you're looking for some low gearing. Besides, not everybody is a strong rider or is maybe getting *ahem* on the older side.

Enjoy your ride,
Murph

[TheseGoTo11]

Back to the GRX group...... I wish Shimano had given options for lower gearing. Yes, there are other options, but Shimano should see the need. Over at RKP, Patrick had a conversation with a Shimano rep who said something like “If you ever need gearing lower than 30-34, maybe you should be on a mt bike”. Sorry, but I strongly disagree with that. A lot of these rides have grades that are 20+%, and when you hit one of those near the end of a long day, you're looking for some low gearing. Besides, not everybody is a strong rider or is maybe getting *ahem* on the older side.

I did Ride the Rockies a couple years ago. A significant portion of the participants were on the older side. I recall shaking my head watching many riders, young and old alike, grind up climbs on bikes with compact cranks that were clearly overgeared. It was an eye-opener to the number of folks out there that could really benefit from lower gear options. These are folks with disposable income, too, riding really nice bikes. Seems like there is a market for low road gearing in a high end groupset, like Ultegra (I'd pay full price for an R8000 triple in a heartbeat). Maybe it's not as great as I think, though. Surely Shimano does its marketing homework to understand demand.

[oldpotatoe]

I did Ride the Rockies a couple years ago. A significant portion of the participants were on the older side. I recall shaking my head watching many riders, young and old alike, grind up climbs on bikes with compact cranks that were clearly overgeared. It was an eye-opener to the number of folks out there that could really benefit from lower gear options. These are folks with disposable income, too, riding really nice bikes. Seems like there is a market for low road gearing in a high end groupset, like Ultegra (I'd pay full price for an R8000 triple in a heartbeat). Maybe it's not as great as I think, though. Surely Shimano does its marketing homework to understand demand.

Indeed...
Really?..how many triple road groups are offered these days by anybody?

[eddief]

new Roubaix is 48-32 in the front and 11-36 in the rear. Almost identical low gear inch range to my triples with 52-42-30 front and 11-34 rear. Granted you have to deal with big jumps in the front but the Di2 is snappy in shifting those rear gears and with synchro the Di2 will shift the rear a couple of cogs as needed when you shift front derailleur.

I did Ride the Rockies a couple years ago. A significant portion of the participants were on the older side. I recall shaking my head watching many riders, young and old alike, grind up climbs on bikes with compact cranks that were clearly overgeared. It was an eye-opener to the number of folks out there that could really benefit from lower gear options. These are folks with disposable income, too, riding really nice bikes. Seems like there is a market for low road gearing in a high end groupset, like Ultegra (I'd pay full price for an R8000 triple in a heartbeat). Maybe it's not as great as I think, though. Surely Shimano does its marketing homework to understand demand.

[93KgBike]

IMHO, The Old Growth Classic (http://oldgrowthclassic.com/race/#the_course) is a really good medium for continuing to examine the boundary between dropbar gravel/CX and XC mtb. Wish I coulda gone. The pros all race in the drops, but I'd guess the entire event is 50/50?

I used to mtb all over that area covered by the course, and changed my gearing so that I could commute to the trailheads at a reasonable pace. XTR had FD 48t clearance and I ran that with an XO setup whatever year that came out. The end result was 48/34/24 11-34 I think.

I'd try GRX on a CX with a 52 flat bar.