Sram engineering + reliability strike again

[tombtfslpk]

Originally Posted by Gummee

That fixes one problem, but doesn't fix the 'the public are beta testers' thing SRAM has had going on for years now. I suspect it's their 'beat Shimano to the punch' mentality, but don't work for SRAM

M

I have never been let down by SRAM's supposed "beta testing" in tens of thousands of miles.
I can't say the same about Campagnolo rear derailleurs, or Shimano Dura Ace and Ultegra shifters with broken cables.
I anticipate that I'm not alone in my findings.
My opinion is that all of these drivetrain manufacturers rush products out with an emphasis on expedience over analysis.
It's unfortunate that folks can't let go of preconceived negative stereotypes.
All of this sounds like a typical racing program where a manufacturer finds a part supplier to attempt to find a competitive advantage....and fails. Happens all of the time, out of the public eye.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by tombtfslpk

It's unfortunate that folks can't let go of preconceived negative stereotypes.

yea, but unless you happen to work for sram, this shouldnt be a big deal. its not as if these are negative stereotypes against a particular race of people, or the components we are talking about are connected to dialysis machines or emergency airbag systems.

it's just bike stuff. pros ride what they are told to ride, and us amateur hacks ride what we like.

same as the old chevy/ford fued. i definitely know guys who would NEVER own a ford product, because their old camaro outran their buddies mustang at the track every sunday.

trash talking the "other" component manufacturer is a conversation as old as cycling. facts need not get in the way!

[froze]

Originally Posted by El Chaba

Who-other than the sponsor-didn't see this coming?

LOL!! My feelings exactly.

[tombtfslpk]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

yea, but unless you happen to work for sram, this shouldnt be a big deal. its not as if these are negative stereotypes against a particular race of people, or the components we are talking about are connected to dialysis machines or emergency airbag systems.

it's just bike stuff. pros ride what they are told to ride, and us amateur hacks ride what we like.

same as the old chevy/ford fued. i definitely know guys who would NEVER own a ford product, because their old camaro outran their buddies mustang at the track every sunday.

trash talking the "other" component manufacturer is a conversation as old as cycling. facts need not get in the way!

I know, I'm a Chevy guy. Yet I own a Ford and Nissan, and a Jeep and Chevy. (age based progression) Raced Ford, GM and Chrysler products. I've been told what to use before, even if I didn't like it.
I work to be open minded enough to choose the appropriate product based upon expectations and application. If I choose wrong I'll accept the consequences.
I'm too old and tired for the "mine is better than yours" stuff any more.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by tombtfslpk

I'm too old and tired for the "mine is better than yours" stuff any more.

[froze]

What I would like to know is why all this new school stuff is failing at such a high rate? When I use to race back in the caveman era, that's the 70's and 80's to you all, I never had a mechanical failure, not including flats of course, and that included while racing and training, and I ran on all Suntour, which not only survived my racing years but it survived all the years since then and up to this present day with now around 160,000 miles on the components. While I did take care of my stuff I seriously doubt I did anywhere near as good of a job than a pro mechanic.

I haven't had any issues with my newest stuff the 105 components (Ultegra rear) on my Lynskey I got in 2013, but I haven't put on anywhere near as many miles as did when I use to race so that's not a fair comparison.

[m4rk540]

Originally Posted by froze

What I would like to know is why all this new school stuff is failing at such a high rate? When I use to race back in the caveman era, that's the 70's and 80's to you all, I never had a mechanical failure

I haven't had any issues with my newest stuff the 105 components (Ultegra rear) on my Lynskey I got in 2013, but I haven't put on anywhere near as many miles as did when I use to race so that's not a fair comparison.

These days.

Durability
Affordability
Low weight-abililty

Choose one.

[FlashUNC]

Originally Posted by froze

What I would like to know is why all this new school stuff is failing at such a high rate? When I use to race back in the caveman era, that's the 70's and 80's to you all, I never had a mechanical failure, not including flats of course, and that included while racing and training, and I ran on all Suntour, which not only survived my racing years but it survived all the years since then and up to this present day with now around 160,000 miles on the components.

Your derailleur pulley wheels must look like pizza cutters by now.

[Gummee]

Originally Posted by tombtfslpk

I have never been let down by SRAM's supposed "beta testing" in tens of thousands of miles.
I can't say the same about Campagnolo rear derailleurs, or Shimano Dura Ace and Ultegra shifters with broken cables.
I anticipate that I'm not alone in my findings.
My opinion is that all of these drivetrain manufacturers rush products out with an emphasis on expedience over analysis.
It's unfortunate that folks can't let go of preconceived negative stereotypes.
All of this sounds like a typical racing program where a manufacturer finds a part supplier to attempt to find a competitive advantage....and fails. Happens all of the time, out of the public eye.

I'm not talking out my rear end here. I lost count of how many SRAM/Avid brakes I've had to warranty because of one fault or another. Just like Shimano, there have been a handful of normal shifters and derailleurs.

...like the recall on the 1st SRAM ydro road brakes...

Nope. I'll stick to Shimano and if needed Campy rather than run SRAM stuff.

Speaking of which, I need to bleed the 'ridden 9x' SRAM brakes on my Top Fuel. ...or I could swap em out for the XTs I have waiting.

I'd love for them to get their crap straight again. I do like the design philosophy. Just not their ability to manufacture anything

M

[froze]

Originally Posted by m4rk540

These days.

Durability
Affordability
Low weight-abililty

Choose one.

Just because it was the 70's and 80's doesn't mean people were blind to having lighter weight stuff on their bikes, in fact if you know anything about vintage stuff they even drilled out stuff to make it lighter what was called drillium.

So a Suntour Cyclone MKII rear derailleur weighed 164 grams, Shimano DA mechanical weighs 166 grams...hmmm. And what's really weird is that the Suntour Cyclone MKII wasn't even the lightest derailleur back in that era, the lightest was the Huret Jubilee that weighed 145 grams, but the performance of the Huret wasn't as good as the Suntour due to flexing issues with the cage but it seemed to have no mechanical issues that I ever heard of but I have no first hand experience with the Huret. I stayed away from French stuff because they seemed to be the worst performing of all the components that were out there back then.

[froze]

Originally Posted by FlashUNC

Your derailleur pulley wheels must look like pizza cutters by now.

the Pulleys are a maintenance item so let's not get weird here, as is the chain and cables, thus my original suntour chain and pulleys are long gone as well, but the bearings that were in the original pulleys never failed which isn't a big deal since I can't recall ever seeing any pulley bearing fail no matter the brand or era. But I do have the original bearings in my Suntour Superbe grease port hubs, as well as in my BB, and the hubs are the smoothest and free spinning hubs of all the hubs I have including my other vintage and much more modern ones I have.

[m4rk540]

Originally Posted by froze

Just because it was the 70's and 80's doesn't mean people were blind to having lighter weight stuff on their bikes, in fact if you know anything about vintage stuff they even drilled out stuff to make it lighter what was called drillium.

So a Suntour Cyclone MKII rear derailleur weighed 164 grams, Shimano DA mechanical weighs 166 grams...hmmm. And what's really weird is that the Suntour Cyclone MKII wasn't even the lightest derailleur back in that era, the lightest was the Huret Jubilee that weighed 145 grams, but the performance of the Huret wasn't as good as the Suntour due to flexing issues with the cage but it seemed to have no mechanical issues that I ever heard of but I have no first hand experience with the Huret. I stayed away from French stuff because they seemed to be the worst performing of all the components that were out there back then.

That's what I mean. 70's were better.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by tombtfslpk

I have never been let down by SRAM's supposed "beta testing" in tens of thousands of miles.
I can't say the same about Campagnolo rear derailleurs, or Shimano Dura Ace and Ultegra shifters with broken cables.
I anticipate that I'm not alone in my findings.
My opinion is that all of these drivetrain manufacturers rush products out with an emphasis on expedience over analysis.
It's unfortunate that folks can't let go of preconceived negative stereotypes.
All of this sounds like a typical racing program where a manufacturer finds a part supplier to attempt to find a competitive advantage....and fails. Happens all of the time, out of the public eye.

What gummee above said...

Maybe but your 'findings' may not be the same as 'some' who are in the trenches, in the bike shop, and see dozens of bikes, with many different groups from the different manufacturers, every week..or those who are bike product managers or warranty centers that 'may' see a different picture.

[froze]

Originally Posted by m4rk540

That's what I mean. 70's were better.

It's a give and take between old school and new school stuff. For example, I'll take modern tires and tubes over the old stuff any day of the week, they are a quantum leap forward superior. Modern cables are better in regards to reduced friction. I won't get into frame material discussion other than to say I love my modern titanium framed bike over steel in comfort...but I liked steel over other materials in regards to comfort, and I like the artsy look of the older steel bikes, obviously high end carbon is the lightest material currently, but there's more to life than having the lightest thing you can buy. Old school chains and gears lasted at least twice as long as the new school stuff, but in order to get more gears they had to reduce the thickness of the gears which shortened their life, and make narrower and thinner material chains which of course shortened their lives as well, so while it's con the modern stuff doesn't last as long but it's also a pro because you get more gears so I guess it's a push. Also modern aluminium rims are much better, they're lighter yet stronger and more aero, I wouldn't go that far with CF rims. Rim brakes pads for aluminium rims have seen no change, 80's era Scott Mathauser orange solid pads are virtually unchanged except for the name was changed to Kool Stop Salmon pads, which are still the best today. Some argue that the braking power of modern disk brakes are the best, under certain circumstances that's true but not on dry days, they're the same, why you scream? Because braking forces are all subject to the tire's adhesion to the road and that's it, nothing more, once you reach the adhesion limits the tires will skid and this can be done no matter what era of brake your using; some will argue that disk brakes react faster, true, but there is also less modulation, which is why I like my single pivot brakes better than my dual pivot brakes even though my dual pivots react faster I can't modulate them as well as I can with my single pivots, and disk brakes have taken that modulation factor even further out of the picture. This lack of modulation is something that I like to feel like I have total control and can feel what the brakes are doing, it's like one of my cars has steering by wire, it just doesn't have that feeling of being connected to the car and the road like hydraulic has, the same is true with that same car that has throttle by wire. Of course this entire paragraph is just my opinion but that's what forums are for is to share opinions.

What's really a weird thing I noticed since I've use to own Ergo and still have STI is that Suntour Superbe Tech and my Mountech derailleurs both shift just as fast and sometimes faster when done properly, and those are friction. Even my SIS stuff shifts a tad faster than modern Ergo and STI; in fact SIS is much closer to the speed of friction, sometimes friction is faster sometimes slower depending if on how accurately I engage the shifter. I know what some of you are thinking that I'm full of schit, but if own these types of bikes (especially with Suntour derailleurs) and spent any time riding them you would know that I'm not. What a lot of people don't realize is that today's STI is really just SIS that they relocated the shifter from the down tube to the brake levers, that's all they did, and because of the extra length of cable travel and more cable bends with STI it slows down the response vs SIS downtube shifters. Of course you can argue that STI is faster due to the shifter is in the brake lever and you don't have to waste time reaching down to grab shifters, this is true, but I was talking about the mechanical function not the human physical function.

The other thing I hear about electronic shifting as a major pro to having them is that they will shift under load, ok, but so did my Suntour Superbe Tech! Yeah people didn't realize that Superbe Tech (and Mountech so far on mild hills of NE Indiana with a touring load, but I haven't used it on steep mountains yet to know just how much it can do that) was capable of that feat; I use to race in the mountains of So. California and would grab gears all the time with the Superbe Tech without backing off the pedal pressure, the thing would shift with a bang, which was a bit rougher on the gears but I was racing so I didn't care if the rear gears had to be replaced a bit more frequently, but they still lasted twice as long as the chain. And electronic shifting as added a level of complexity to cycling that is what the opposite of what cycling was originally designed to be, and it only stands to reason with that complexity has come reliability issues.

[Jaybee]

This thread is full of nostalgia and anecdotes, and very little in the way of actual quantitative data.