Sram engineering + reliability strike again

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by batman1425

Chainstay length. The 2018 Sram tech docs say 395mm minimum for 1X setups. The Strada is listed at 405 but 3T may have tweaked the rear end alignment or relative BB location because it is a 1x only setup which might change that range for this particular frame. Sram say in the tech docs that drops from the big ring under load are a risk if chainstay length is not optimal. What is optimal could be debatable in this case depending on the specific geometry of the Strada, ring size, etc.

The 2017 tech docs made a distinction about 130 vs. 135/142 hub spacing for 2x11 setups where anything with 135mm spacing needed at minimum 405mm for a 50T big ring, 410mm for a 52, and 430mm for a 53. No mention of a different standard for 1X in those docs that I can find though the 1x ring is in a different location that either the big or little ring on a 2x, so unclear of these numbers would be directly transferrable to a 1x application.

Most of the bikes that 1X functions smoothly on are cross and gravel bikes which typically have much longer chainstays than the Strada. Clutch RD and narrow wide rings all help, but if this setup is at the limit of chain angle tolerance, quite reasonable that world tour watts could flex/stress things enough to cause problems.

You mentioned 405mm..NOT trying to argue and the choice of frameset 'may' have an effect on the numerous mechanical problems this team seems to be having..BUT it 'seems' clear to me it's the function of the group, not the fact that it happens to be 1by.

Further, I'd put $20 on the rider dissatisfaction being that they don't like 1X for road applications (which I think is reasonable IMO, but is a different issue than the "lab rat" with unproven tech) not that it doesn't function how it should.

Gotta believe, as the first 1by road setup on the international stage, sram was deeply involved in it's installation and testing...but.....They have been on these rigs for 5months+.

[unterhausen]

Originally Posted by batman1425

In reality, I think a sizable portion of the amateur road riding population would be functionally happy with a 1X road setup. I'd say 95-97% of my road riding could be satisfied with a 48T ring and an 11-36 cassette.

I would say this is true for the vast majority of riders. I'm riding road on a 46-11 high gear. My gravel bike has a 42-11 high gear, and that's really enough for my riding. 42-11 is higher than the classic 52-14 that was the high gear that most of us had available when I started riding.

I was looking at going 1x for my randonneuring climbing bike, but that was before the advent of ridiculously big cassettes and I didn't think I could get a low enough gear in combo with a high enough gear. Now I could probably get it to work. Not sure I really want to do it though, 2x is fine for me. OTOH, I was recently about 100 miles into a cold, rainy ride and had to use my whole arm to shift my fd because my fingers were frozen. My mind immediately went to 1x experiments.

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by colker

There is zero trouble w/a front derrailleur. Perfect chainline w/ 2x. Perfect tight gearing.
1x on road racing bikes is bad.
The end.

Maybe,

Just curious how many miles you have an a 1X system?

[colker]

Originally Posted by charliedid

Maybe,

Just curious how many miles you have an a 1X system?

I will never have any miles on 1x system on racing road bikes.
I am sorry for the team and it´s riders who were forced to ride under horrible technical conditions just so a couple companies could sell a stupid idea on the market.

[batman1425]

Originally Posted by colker

Chainstays on racing road bikes are usually 407mm. Look for something else to blame.

And 1X systems were originally optimized for bikes with 420mm+ chainstays, with 2x optimized for the approx 405mm road standard. They may work on a 405mm bike but far from what it was optimized for.

[charliedid]

Originally Posted by colker

I will never have any miles on 1x system on racing road bikes.
I am sorry for the team and it´s riders who were forced to ride under horrible technical conditions just so a couple companies could sell a stupid idea on the market.

That's fine and for the record I don't know that 1x on road racing bikes it the best thing but it's kind of lake saying you hate apples but never tried one.

[batman1425]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

You mentioned 405mm..NOT trying to argue and the choice of frameset 'may' have an effect on the numerous mechanical problems this team seems to be having..BUT it 'seems' clear to me it's the function of the group, not the fact that it happens to be 1by.

My point is that this 1x group was designed to work in a specific frame geometry range with specific contraints which this frame may be right on the limit of. It's most common application is further within those constraints. Shimano and campy have functional limits to what they can reliably be bolted to as well. This particular frame may be pushing this stuff right to the edge of it's tolerance range. So yes, I agree it is not "functioning" as it should but that may be no fault of the group set but rather the fact that is it on a frame that is incompatible.

If the failures they refer to are parts breaking, coming lose, etc. thats a different story. But I read these reports differently. It's also important to cut through the hyperbole in the reports. He's was frustrated for sure pointing to this not being an isolated incident. But we don't know what those other problems were or how many there really are.

[rain dogs]

So, 3T makes a fairly standard geometry road bike and partners with Sram who are happily pushing 1x for road (hence this Aqua Blue Bike Project) and although SRAM designs the system and optimizes it for certain chainstay lengths it is 3T's fault for making a standard geo road bike? Ha! Was 3T supposed to make a mountain bike for the TdF?

Color me confused.

If Sram can't make a 1x that works reliably on a road bike, don't push your PR and marketing for road use.... No one's fault but their own. If Sram felt like the bike wouldn't have been compatible, it is wholly their responsibility to say their system isn't recommended for that use. They obviously haven't done that.

BTW... they Aqua Blue regularly use Sram cassettes. Look at nearly every bike review of their bikes, the vast majority have Sram cassettes. This is a Sram cassette is it not?



And this is a picture of Mark Christian #182 from the TDS where this controversy started. He's using and all Sram drivetrain - cassette, chain, chainrings and cranks

[91Bear]

From Cyclingnews.com:

"While the 3T Strada, designed by Cervelo founder and acclaimed bicycle design engineer Gerard Vroomen, has drawn plaudits for its future-thinking design, there have also been questions on the drawbacks of larger gear jumps at the highest level of racing in the sport due to the single chainring. However Vroomen and 3T have developed a special 9-32 tooth cassette that helps reduce the gear ratio jumps."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aqua...rada-for-2018/

[unterhausen]

Originally Posted by rain dogs

BTW... they Aqua Blue regularly use Sram cassettes. Look at nearly every bike review of their bikes, the vast majority have Sram cassettes. This is a Sram cassette is it not?

Looks like they might have mixed cassettes, which may or may not work depending on the ramps. But is that really a 407 chain stay length?

Originally Posted by rain dogs

[unterhausen]

Okay, looking at it again, they have seat tube way behind the bb for aero, it probably is a 407 chainstay.

[vqdriver]

So just how much say does a team actually have in deciding what to ride?
Y'all making it seem like they HAVE to do what the sponsor says. But i find it hard to believe the team didnt agree to ride 1x road disc to be the poster child for sram.

If the he had taken the stage, i doubt they would have declined any media coverage

[vqdriver]

And fwiw, I hate whenever athletes or teams get into spats with their sponsors. Before the fact they're courting each other and then afterward it always gets ugly and nasty. I don't care if it's cycling or basketball or tennis or football. There hasn't been an instance of this where you say at the end "well that was a classy way to handle it"

[batman1425]

Originally Posted by vqdriver

So just how much say does a team actually have in deciding what to ride?
Y'all making it seem like they HAVE to do what the sponsor says. But i find it hard to believe the team didnt agree to ride 1x road disc to be the poster child for sram.

If the he had taken the stage, i doubt they would have declined any media coverage

I have to agree with this too. This case might be different though as the title sponsor is in cycling retail. The big money provider my have requirements for certain lower tier sponsors.

[simonov]

Originally Posted by unterhausen

Okay, looking at it again, they have seat tube way behind the bb for aero, it probably is a 407 chainstay.

It's not. According to their own website, they're 405 chainstays with a 71 bb drop. Depending on the size of the crank that could be below SRAM's specification or, at best, at the limits of what that group was designed for. Especially when they're not using SRAM cassettes some or much of the time.

As for all the arguments that SRAM is pushing 1x, other than offering a 1x alternative, for which there's a clear market, how are they pushing it? They still offer FDs for all their road groups.