New Sram Red eTap AXS group

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by saab2000

I think they’re offering three different options for their chainring setup, all with 13-tooth difference from small to large. That’s my understanding at least.

So it’s expensive to swap them out out they do offer options.

Yeah, apparently the powermeter/chainring assembly is about $820 - that's a chunk of change for changing chainring size.

And what's up with all the cassettes starting with 10 tooth sprockets. Smaller sprockets have greater energy losses, so you're leaving some energy behind when you use these cassettes.

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Yeah, apparently the powermeter/chainring assembly is about $820 - that's a chunk of change for changing chainring size.

And what's up with all the cassettes starting with 10 tooth sprockets. Smaller sprockets have greater energy losses, so you're leaving some energy behind when you use these cassettes.

The cost is crazy. But I heard the GCN guy say he likes the “No Holds Barred” philosophy. We know there is trickle down in bike tech even if there isn’t everywhere else.

I’ll toot my own horn for a second. I first did a 50/39 with an 11-28 about 3 years ago and find it to be a really useful setup. I’m glad SRAM is copying my gearing philosophy!

[R3awak3n]

The starting on the 10 is silly to me, even 46-11 is plenty... If you are going to be racing you will probably not want the 46 crankset. I guess they did it to have an equivalent to 53-11. I bet they will release different cassettes eventually. Would be nice to have a 11-34 cassette for example with less gaps at the end.


As far as the PM, I still think its super silly what they have done BUT I guess you can always not run quarq and run vector pedals or powertap pedals OR run a different crankset (they will come)

[EDS]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Yeah, apparently the powermeter/chainring assembly is about $820 - that's a chunk of change for changing chainring size.

And what's up with all the cassettes starting with 10 tooth sprockets. Smaller sprockets have greater energy losses, so you're leaving some energy behind when you use these cassettes.

The Force version that is scheduled to come out in April allegedly does not have the integrated power meter so likely a cheaper path forward for those that like to swap out chain rings.

[shoota]

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

The starting on the 10 is silly to me, even 46-11 is plenty... If you are going to be racing you will probably not want the 46 crankset. I guess they did it to have an equivalent to 53-11. I bet they will release different cassettes eventually. Would be nice to have a 11-34 cassette for example with less gaps at the end.

Enough for what?

I couldn't disagree more, the 10T is a game changer. It enables a much smaller chainring which then enables a smaller big cog for the equivalent low and high end of a 53/39, all with a tighter cassette. It's literally better in every way.

[Lanternrouge]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Yeah, apparently the powermeter/chainring assembly is about $820 - that's a chunk of change for changing chainring size.

And what's up with all the cassettes starting with 10 tooth sprockets. Smaller sprockets have greater energy losses, so you're leaving some energy behind when you use these cassettes.

One of the articles I saw said the SRAM folks say the things work out you don't really lose anything in terms of efficiency. Of course, you do lose the ability to run the wheels you are used to using unless SRAM 12 works with Campy 12 cassettes. Also, the SRAM folks may be a little biased in this regard.

[BikeNY]

Originally Posted by shoota

Enough for what?

I couldn't disagree more, the 10T is a game changer. It enables a much smaller chainring which then enables a smaller big cog for the equivalent low and high end of a 53/39, all with a tighter cassette. It's literally better in every way.

Except efficiency of course...

[Charles M]

This stuff is quiet...

The gearing spread using XDR makes for smaller stiffer rings and the front shifting is bang on... or it isnt. there's no bang. It's VERY quick but it's smooth enough that it's without any sort of fuss. No chain slap...

Etap was already the easiest to install by miles.

Thank Fairwheel Bikes for sequential and corrected shifting... They were doing this for years with Hacking DI2... Including my Bedford Project...

https://www.pezcyclingnews.com/lates...-custom-steel/





Campy's 12 is also very good ratios, smooth, tight and quiet, large jockey wheels, and their disc brakes are fantastic.

[JimmyTango]

Originally Posted by Lanternrouge

One of the articles I saw said the SRAM folks say the things work out you don't really lose anything in terms of efficiency. Of course, you do lose the ability to run the wheels you are used to using unless SRAM 12 works with Campy 12 cassettes. Also, the SRAM folks may be a little biased in this regard.

Actually, it sounds like you can use existing wheels-- you just need to swap out the old 11s freehub for the new xdr.

[Idris Icabod]

Canyon already has some models available with this new group. The Ultimate is $7,500 compared to the similar Dura Ace Di2 model at $7,000 (no power meter on either). I'm pretty sure they only have 1 or 2 of each in stock because large was available about an hour ago and now it is sold out.

[R3awak3n]

Originally Posted by shoota

Enough for what?

I couldn't disagree more, the 10T is a game changer. It enables a much smaller chainring which then enables a smaller big cog for the equivalent low and high end of a 53/39, all with a tighter cassette. It's literally better in every way.

46-11 is enough for a lot of people and a lot would prefer a tighter ration at the end of the cassette than a 10t which they might never use.

Again its about choices. I have 46-11 on my bike and after a few rides I barelly even went to it (I don’t race and dont ride in fast pacelines so ymmv). And a 10t is teeny so inneficient and will have a short life

[EDS]

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

46-11 is enough for a lot of people and a lot would prefer a tighter ration at the end of the cassette than a 10t which they might never use.

Again its about choices. I have 46-11 on my bike and after a few rides I barelly even went to it (I don’t race and dont ride in fast pacelines so ymmv). And a 10t is teeny so inneficient and will have a short life

10 teeth may be more inefficient than 11 but for the short life I believe most riders will spend a fraction of the time in their biggest gear versus the middle of the cassette. At least I know that is true of my riding, even though in my case that gear is 53x12.

[thirdgenbird]

The tech is really cool, and I think it is neat that it exists, but it almost makes me want a new Campagnolo mechanical group with rim brakes even more...

Does 12spd Campagnolo play nice with a white industries crankset?

[m_sasso]

Nice chainwheels!



No thanks, just more of this:

Originally Posted by KidWok

Here's another thought. The bike companies got stupid the last 20 years and now it's finally caught up with them.

Let's take Dura Ace for example. The 74xx series lasted 11 years. 7700 lasted 8. 7800 lasted 4.

Colnago...The C40 was around for 10 years. Then replaced by the C50. Then the C55, C59, and C64.

Mavic started the wave of disposable wheel systems with the Helium. Then everyone got into the habit putting out "New and improved" year after year.

The bike industry moved towards a path of forced obsolescence with all of the ridiculous marketing claims driving people to buy buy buy. And they did...for awhile. I think it gets harder and harder to get people to do that when they just unloaded a few grand on a really sweet bike a couple of years ago. We see it in here all the time in the classifieds...prices are soft and people are always saying "if I wasn't already sitting on so much stuff". Plenty of people here are sitting on enough hardware that they won't wear out in their lifetimes.

To either counterpoint those who say it is due to people buying mail order and from overseas, I'd say it was the bike industry that cannibalized itself.

Tai!

[shoota]

Originally Posted by BikeNY

Except efficiency of course...

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

46-11 is enough for a lot of people and a lot would prefer a tighter ration at the end of the cassette than a 10t which they might never use.

Again its about choices. I have 46-11 on my bike and after a few rides I barelly even went to it (I don’t race and dont ride in fast pacelines so ymmv). And a 10t is teeny so inneficient and will have a short life

Inefficient in what way? Serious question. SRAM is claiming there is no efficiency loss with this group.