Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
keyboardmonkey
Posts: 661
Joined: 1 Dec 2009, 5:05pm
Location: Yorkshire

Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby keyboardmonkey » 10 Jul 2018, 9:06pm

Imagine you are a boss at Rotor and one of your engineers comes to you with the idea of a 1x13 hydraulic groupset. You are allowed to dismiss the engineer without notice if you can list ten good reasons why the idea is not a good one. Take it away:

http://road.cc/content/tech-news/244867 ... c-groupset

And for balance let’s hear any plus points.

Samuel D
Posts: 2888
Joined: 8 Mar 2015, 11:05pm
Location: Paris

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby Samuel D » 10 Jul 2018, 11:57pm

  1. The compromised chainring size used in a 1x set-up demands smaller rear sprockets at cruising speeds. The result is greater power loss in the drivetrain for the majority of your ride.
  2. Said smaller sprockets wear more quickly.
  3. The wear problem is compounded by frequently awful chain angles.
  4. Consumables are ridiculously expensive, both because they are presently aimed at early adopters and because they are more costly to make (huge 13-speed cassettes, ultra-narrow chains with counterbored side plates to achieve the necessary strength without the pin overhanging the plate, etc.).
  5. Thirteen sprockets do nothing good for rear wheel strength, stiffness (hence disk-brake only according to Rotor), and/or weight.
  6. Hydraulic actuation increases costs, breaks backward compatibility, and dissuades home mechanicking while offering no compelling upside.
  7. Removing the front derailleur increases the risk of the chain falling off (see the recent Aqua Blue Sport 1x saga in pro road racing) and removes the possibility of quickly getting it back on without stopping and dirtying your hands.
  8. Total range and/or close ratios are sacrificed compared to a double or triple with fewer rear sprockets and all the advantages accruing from that.
  9. If your rear shifting stops working for any reason, you don’t have the usual front shifting left as a get-home aid.
  10. The arrangement is unavoidably ugly on a road bike that should look sparse and lightweight.

peetee
Posts: 1646
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Cornwall

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby peetee » 11 Jul 2018, 12:20am

Positives?
Well, +1 to the marketing department if anyone takes this seriously.
That's it really.

The comment about the aero advantage of a single ring made me laugh. As if a chunky long cage mech and sprockets the size of dustbin lids didn't affect airflow.
Current status report:
Back on two wheels in deepest Pastyland and loving every minute. Mission: to enjoy big, bad hills again.

thelawnet
Posts: 2278
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby thelawnet » 11 Jul 2018, 5:54am

keyboardmonkey wrote:Imagine you are a boss at Rotor and one of your engineers comes to you with the idea of a 1x13 hydraulic groupset. You are allowed to dismiss the engineer without notice if you can list ten good reasons why the idea is not a good one. Take it away:

http://road.cc/content/tech-news/244867 ... c-groupset

And for balance let’s hear any plus points.


To be clear, they already had a 2x11 hydraulic groupset, so this has many advantages for them including reusing unsold shifters, and getting away from the less than compelling concept of a hydraulic groupset to the one-upmanship of n+1, which is the only game that counts in marketing terms.

mattsccm
Posts: 2875
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby mattsccm » 11 Jul 2018, 6:52am

Of course it will give the Luddites something to talk about as well.
Now I am not convinced as I like 1 tooth changes and this would probably really only work on a TT bike for flat courses or maybe a CX bike, but if that isn't an issue then why not 1 x13? Expensive parts are not the sole preserve of the experienced cyclist who keps a steady cadence.
Wear isn't an issue to many people. The last thing on my mind is usually wear. I don't want things to wear out but its not a big deal. I like playing with bikes. If they never wore out where would the fun be?
Again, to some its so important that they can drag the issue out every time something new appears. Fair enough. I assume that their inch pitch fixed wheelers are fine for their riding.
I assume that the opponents who go on about the drag statements have back up. The claim is that front mechs etc have a bigger effect than rear ones . Quite possibly. There is much research out there and I doubt most people don't know much about it.
Given a bike buying budget that would allow me to buy small countries I'd have this set up, modified of course to have a triple up front.

mercalia
Posts: 12253
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby mercalia » 11 Jul 2018, 9:35am

keyboardmonkey wrote:Imagine you are a boss at Rotor and one of your engineers comes to you with the idea of a 1x13 hydraulic groupset. You are allowed to dismiss the engineer without notice if you can list ten good reasons why the idea is not a good one. Take it away:

http://road.cc/content/tech-news/244867 ... c-groupset

And for balance let’s hear any plus points.


isnt that called a Rohloff? except for the hydraulic part

Brucey
Posts: 36637
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby Brucey » 11 Jul 2018, 10:36am

Samuel D wrote:
  1. The compromised chainring size used in a 1x set-up demands smaller rear sprockets at cruising speeds. The result is greater power loss in the drivetrain for the majority of your ride.
  2. Said smaller sprockets wear more quickly.
  3. The wear problem is compounded by frequently awful chain angles.
  4. Consumables are ridiculously expensive, both because they are presently aimed at early adopters and because they are more costly to make (huge 13-speed cassettes, ultra-narrow chains with counterbored side plates to achieve the necessary strength without the pin overhanging the plate, etc.).
  5. Thirteen sprockets do nothing good for rear wheel strength, stiffness (hence disk-brake only according to Rotor), and/or weight.
  6. Hydraulic actuation increases costs, breaks backward compatibility, and dissuades home mechanicking while offering no compelling upside.
  7. Removing the front derailleur increases the risk of the chain falling off (see the recent Aqua Blue Sport 1x saga in pro road racing) and removes the possibility of quickly getting it back on without stopping and dirtying your hands.
  8. Total range and/or close ratios are sacrificed compared to a double or triple with fewer rear sprockets and all the advantages accruing from that.
  9. If your rear shifting stops working for any reason, you don’t have the usual front shifting left as a get-home aid.
  10. The arrangement is unavoidably ugly on a road bike that should look sparse and lightweight.


to which I'd add that

- the gear ratios are (unavoidably) unevenly spaced (in contrast to rohloff etc)

on the list of possible pluses, I'd mention that (depending on how it is implemented) hydraulic gear actuation may offer multiple shifter positions. Not sure if that applies in this case or not.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15070
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby Si » 11 Jul 2018, 12:03pm

I saw the stuff about the rotor 1*13 on SingleTrack.....am I just not paying attention or have they skipped 1*12?

tim_f
Posts: 248
Joined: 12 Oct 2009, 10:37pm

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby tim_f » 11 Jul 2018, 1:36pm

I saw the stuff about the rotor 1*13 on SingleTrack.....am I just not paying attention or have they skipped 1*12?


The mech has a bolt allowing switch between 12 and 13.

One good thing is that mountain and road components are interchangeable so could combine road drop bar lever and mountain bike cassette.

However still think my 3 * 9 speed XT with bar end levers is better on my drop bar Salsa 29er is better :-)

PH
Posts: 8070
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby PH » 11 Jul 2018, 1:54pm

mercalia wrote:isnt that called a Rohloff? except for the hydraulic part

I don't know if this ever made it to production
https://bikerumor.com/2016/05/30/rohlof ... bpod-pshr/

keyboardmonkey
Posts: 661
Joined: 1 Dec 2009, 5:05pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby keyboardmonkey » 26 Feb 2019, 1:24pm


Brucey
Posts: 36637
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby Brucey » 26 Feb 2019, 2:51pm

the link with 'everything you need to know' doesn't contain any information about how the intermediate ratios in the cassettes are arranged, other than to say that Rotor's marketing department has decided to call it 'true cadence' spacing. "True bull**it" would be more like it; as you might expect (if you spend more than two seconds thinking about it) the gear intervals are all over the place.

These are the available 13s cassettes;
Image

actual ratios are

10-11-12-13-14-15-17-19-21-24-27-31-36
10-11-12-13-14-15-17-19-21-24-28-32-39
10-11-12-13-15-17-19-22-25-29-34-39-46
10-11-12-13-15-17-19-22-26-31-37-44-52

sprockets 22T and bigger are aluminium. If you don't want to buy new hubs just yet you can 'upgrade' to 12s and you get the identical ratios but no 10T sprocket. 12s cassettes are 'only' about £300 each but 13s cassettes are up to £360 each.

ratios for the 'road' cassettes (with a 36T chainring) are here;

http://ritzelrechner.de/?GR=DERS&KB=36&RZ=10,11,12,13,14,15,17,19,21,24,27,31,36&UF=2185&TF=90&SL=2.3&UN=MPH&DV=gearInches&GR2=DERS&KB2=36&RZ2=10,11,12,13,14,15,17,19,21,24,28,33,39&UF2=2185

and for the larger cassettes here;

http://ritzelrechner.de/?GR=DERS&KB=36&RZ=10,11,12,13,15,17,19,22,25,29,34,39,46&UF=2185&TF=90&SL=2.6&UN=MPH&DV=gearInches&GR2=DERS&KB2=36&RZ2=10,11,12,13,15,17,19,22,26,31,37,44,52&UF2=2185

the headlines are that;

- in the 10-36T cassette gear intervals vary from 7% to 16% and the 7% interval is adjacent to a 13% interval
- in the 10-39T cassette gear intervals vary from 7% to 18% and the 7% interval is adjacent to a 13% interval
- in the 10-46T cassette gear intervals vary from 8% to 18% and the 8% interval is adjacent to a 15% interval
- in the 10-52T cassette gear intervals vary from 8% to 19% and the 8% interval is adjacent to a 15% interval

i.e. all their cassettes have adjacent gear intervals which are almost twice as big as one another. A bit lumpy then....


Needless to say the chainline onto the end sprockets is terrible and together with the chordal losses arising from a 10T sprocket this has to be a candidate for "the world's least efficient gear".

Ho hum. … I'm pretty bored with seeing n+1 now, even when it is dressed up as n+2...... :roll:

It is not even funny now, just a bit tragic.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Brucey
Posts: 36637
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby Brucey » 27 Feb 2019, 7:51am

13s 10-52 cassette;

Image


just in case it isn't obvious, you could take two or three of the larger sprockets from the cassette and use those to replace the single chainring. There would be a slight weight penalty ( roughly the weight of FD plus shifter, less weight of present chainring), but you could end up with more, more useful gear ratios, better chainlines, higher efficiencies, stronger/lighter/less dished rear wheel....

Note that for an average rider a ~0.5% improvement in efficiency (even at cost of an additional ~500g weight, way more than the weight of a FD plus shifter) is probably 'worth it'.

it is worth noting that Rotor have a special motivation for using a 1x setup; they are keen on their oval chainrings and they don't play as well as round ones do once you have a FD in the mix.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

User avatar
fossala
Posts: 1220
Joined: 21 May 2013, 8:29am

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby fossala » 27 Feb 2019, 4:27pm

Brucey wrote:...it is worth noting that Rotor have a special motivation for using a 1x setup; they are keen on their oval chainrings and they don't play as well as round ones do once you have a FD in the mix.

I've also read that their attempt at hydraulic front derailleur was very poor.

On a side note, I would recommend anyone who keeps finding they need the latest thing to watch this 2002 BBC documentary on marketing and consumerism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s

reohn2
Posts: 37367
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Rotor 1x13 hydraulic groupset

Postby reohn2 » 27 Feb 2019, 7:27pm

For obvious reasons,if anyone thinks that isn't an idiotic idea is an idiot!

I make no apologies for that statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I cycle therefore I am.