SRAM new 12-speed road groupset

[thelawnet]

You'll need an XDr freehub (previously released wider hub), which is not to be confused with an XD freehub (for MTB).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGDwQ4YdTgo

The bottom gear goes down to 10t, which is something that SRAM already sell for road bikes, but only in the shape of a 10-42 11-speed cassette aimed at 1x bikes, and costing around £80. This is a 12-speed cassette likely to be sold in the 10-25, 10-26, 10-28, 10-32 range, with simply a 10t cog stuck on top, and will cost £200+.

https://cyclingtips.com/2018/11/2019-sr ... -12-speed/

Basically this means smaller chainrings thanks to the 10t. In theory 53/39 is equivalent to 48/39 but instead they are going for 48/35 & 50/37, so the net outcome is more range in all cases, and either more bottom-end, or more top-end, or both.

The 10t is nothing that couldn't be accomplished with a compact chainset instead of new shifters, derailleurs, free hub, cassette, and chain. It's noted above also that 10t is less efficient than 11t and worse chainline as well...

Also the 12-speed doesn't accomplish anything that couldn't have been done by releasing a 11-speed 10-28t cassette using their existing (2-year-old) bikes, but presumably they didn't want to do that when they can sell people entirely new drivetrains instead.

[Brucey]

I would preface my comments by mentioning that overall I don't think this is a major step forwards per se and the chances of me ever buying any of this kit are absolutely zilch.

However I would point out that in a 2x12 system the chainline is (on 'permitted' ratios) certainly no worse (and indeed probably better) than on a 1x11 system. You wouldn't want to run a 2x12 system cross-chained though! I agree that using a 10T sprocket is somewhat inefficient and potentially fast-wearing; however if it gives you an extra-high gear that means being able to follow others downhill in a racing situation, you can justify it I suppose.

Overall the big three manufacturers are each worried about 'being seen to be left behind' in the technology stakes. This means that in order not to be 'left behind' they need to be first (or at least not last) to launch a new product with some or other headline feature, be it n+1 ratios, an increased gear range, hydraulic brakes, electric shifting, etc etc etc. Thus that SRAM announce a 12s groupset is as predictable as night following day, given that campag have done it already.

There are a few 'innovations' that really provide a palpable improvement in the lot of a cyclist; things that improve comfort, machine reliability, even machine efficiency. But these are few and far between. Part of the reason is that the bicycle, as a machine, has been within a tiny fraction of perfection for decades; marginal gains are all you are likely to get, and they don't come without other compromises. The other part of the reason is that real improvements are basically a hard sell; partly because it means admitting that the previous generation of products (and by inference the current one, probably) were not 'perfect' after all, despite their blandishments.... . By comparison an extra gear is an easy 'advantage' that even the most dull-witted punter will notice. ...'This one goes to eleven'.....'this one goes to twelve, it must be better'....

Duh....

I am perhaps the 'Mr Creosote' of bicycle technology;


electronic shifting with hydraulically actuated GPS, wireless power meter, Bluetooth enabled tubeless frameset, levitation device, fully suspended telepathic shift interface....and....better bring a bucket...

I have had my snout in the technological trough for too long and I have had quite enough of it; one more 'wafer-thin sprocket'.....

and I will probably explode....

cheers

[thelawnet]

I would preface my comments by mentioning that overall I don't think this is a major step forwards per se and the chances of me ever buying any of this kit are absolutely zilch.

However I would point out that in a 2x12 system the chainline is (on 'permitted' ratios) certainly no worse (and indeed probably better) than on a 1x11 system. You wouldn't want to run a 2x12 system cross-chained though! I agree that using a 10T sprocket is somewhat inefficient and potentially fast-wearing; however if it gives you an extra-high gear that means being able to follow others downhill in a racing situation, you can justify it I suppose.

I was comparing Red 2x12 10-28 with the previous Red 2x11 11-28. There isn't a 1x Red option.

Quite a lot of bikes are shipping with SRAM 1x11-42 (11s) road setups, but the 10-42 (11s) doesn't seem to be popular whatever reason. An enforced upgrade to XDr should ensure that changes.

[Cugel]

Personally I've become weary of these "At last! New!! Improved!!!" shouts of the cycling gubbins manufacturers. I have an alternative list for their future wares that I feel would be "at-last, improved, not really new at all".

It begins with cassettes that I can specify myself in the sprocket-toofs I want for my cycling style and pace. Even though my main style is still "fast" (albeit no longer race-fast) I feel that I (and 99% of other cyclists) would benefit from cassettes that begin with 14, 15 or even 16 teeth and go up to 30, 34 or even 36 teeth. Alternatively........

A second item would be a "brazed-on" front gear hanger thingy that allows me to fit chainsets with a much greater range of toofs. At present I'm limited to 50-55 on the big ring. I want 44-48 too; or instead.

As it is I must use the standard chainset, hunting for old Shimano triples in anything above Tiagra. (I can't put a square-taper axle into a BB90 bike - not easily, anyway, so the Spa solution is out). I have to buy schoolboy cassettes of the CS-6600 or CS-6700 to disembowel and put with disembowelled cogs from other cassette types to get the 14-30 or 15-36 that I want.

*****
The "new-improved!" stuff seems to be part of the planned obsolescence thing but also a fashion following various professional cycling trends. It makes me laugh to see all them MAMILs doing 44rpm in their 53/11 - until I remember that their consumer-demographic is preventing me from being able to buy a 15-36 as one already-integrated cassette.

Cugel

[pq]

I'm in favour of more sprockets, at least in theory. Closely spaced gears with a wide range is a very good thing. However this groupset and, to a lesser extent the Campag 12 speed groupset would give me additional gears (compared to my current 10 speed set up) all of which are too large to use. I'll be tempted by a 12 speed set-up if and when there's no compulsion to have a sprocket smaller than 13.

[reohn2]

It all went out the window daft after 9sp,and 11t and 12t sprockets are proven inefficient and are useless.

[scottg]

It all went out the window daft after 9sp,and 11t and 12t sprockets are proven inefficient and are useless.

You missed the howls of protest when 9 speed came out, the even bigger howls when Shimano went to a wider freehub
with 8 speed. 5 speed Shimano freehubs disappeared mere minutes after being introduced, Uniglide anyone.

Me, I lament the lack of quality 3 speed freewheels and rod operated front shifting.

[Brucey]

5s freehubs were 'obsolete' when they were launched; as early as 1978 7-speed sun-tour freewheels were announced and I bought one in my LBS in 1979 or 1980.

Yeah I guess I was a techno-junkie then... .

What you grow up with is 'normal' and once you are invested (personally and/or physically) in a particular scheme that works OK, more that that is just not necessary.

Never seen major benefits in having more than 7 sprockets at the back, except maybe on an MTB, where more emergency gears is always 'better' I suppose... right up until the flimsy chain breaks....

cheers

[reohn2]

It all went out the window daft after 9sp,and 11t and 12t sprockets are proven inefficient and are useless.

You missed the howls of protest when 9 speed came out, the even bigger howls when Shimano went to a wider freehub
with 8 speed. 5 speed Shimano freehubs disappeared mere minutes after being introduced, Uniglide anyone.

Me, I lament the lack of quality 3 speed freewheels and rod operated front shifting.

You seem to have missed the fact that upto 9sp all 5,6,7,8and 9sp(Shimano) MTB and road rear mechs were interchangeable and able to be indexed with the correct changers and that 9sp hubs can accomodate 6,7,8 and 9sp cassettes.
We have the problem of 11sp and above needing a wider cassette which means more dish on the wheel as well as thinner sprockets and chains which wear quicker.
And as if that's not bad enough manufacturers are phasing out triple chainsets in favour of doubles and worse stil 1x drivetrains,both of which mean actually less gears and wider gaps between them to achecieve anything like a decent range.
The more sprockets there are on the rear the more critical and technical the drivetrain needs to be which in turn means it's less tolerable to misuse or abuse.
That's all before we mention the higher cost of replacement parts which will be needed more frequently
Cycling has been sold a pup with 1 and 2x 10/11and now 12sp.In this case more is much less both gears and cash in the pocket.
YVMV mine won't.

[Cugel]

It all went out the window daft after 9sp,and 11t and 12t sprockets are proven inefficient and are useless.

You missed the howls of protest when 9 speed came out, the even bigger howls when Shimano went to a wider freehub
with 8 speed. 5 speed Shimano freehubs disappeared mere minutes after being introduced, Uniglide anyone.

Me, I lament the lack of quality 3 speed freewheels and rod operated front shifting.

You seem to have missed the fact that upto 9sp all 5,6,7,8and 9sp(Shimano) MTB and road rear mechs were interchangeable and able to be indexed with the correct changers and that 9sp hubs can accomodate 6,7,8 and 9sp cassettes.
We have the problem of 11sp and above needing a wider cassette which means more dish on the wheel as well as thinner sprockets and chains which wear quicker.
And as if that's not bad enough manufacturers are phasing out triple chainsets in favour of doubles and worse stil 1x drivetrains,both of which mean actually less gears and wider gaps between them to achecieve anything like a decent range.
The more sprockets there are on the rear the more critical and technical the drivetrain needs to be which in turn means it's less tolerable to misuse or abuse.
That's all before we mention the higher cost of replacement parts which will be needed more frequently
Cycling has been sold a pup with 1 and 2x 10/11and now 12sp.In this case more is much less both gears and cash in the pocket.
YVMV mine won't.

I don't mind plenty of sprockets as I much prefer small gaps in the ratios. I am a pea-sensitive princess when it comes to cadence and must be able to have the right revs for the power I happen to have available at the time.

Do 11 speed parts wear faster than 9 speed parts (for example). If they do, I don't notice and seem to change chains at about the same mileage. I've never had to replace a sprocket or a chainring in the 8 years I've been riding the bikes I acquired then when I sold all my old racing bikes. I put this down to a care bordering on paranoia about chain cleanliness and wear. 0.75 on the chain checker (used frequently) and it's off, even if it might have another 500 miles in it.

What I object to (apart from the planned obsolescence and fashion things) is the failure of Shimano et al to provide the gear ratios I want in a single integrated component set. Like you I feel that 11 and 12 sprockets (and 13 really) are redundant to all cyclists other than very fast racing fellows. Like you I regret the demise of the triple chainset. I have to buy two cassettes to make the one I want and there's always one sprocket jump where the indexing is a bit hesitant as a result of making the Frankenstein cassette, not to mention a few spurious bits of cassette in my bike bit cupboard.

Just in case Mr Shimano is reading I will state that I would like 9, 10 and 11 speed cassettes that start at 14 or 15 and go to 30, 32 or 36. And triple chainsets in all the ranges. So there.

Cugel

[reohn2]

I don't mind plenty of sprockets as I much prefer small gaps in the ratios. I am a pea-sensitive princess when it comes to cadence and must be able to have the right revs for the power I happen to have available at the time.

Iike two tooth gaps in cruising and high ratios,as my optimum cadence(OC) range is narrow against wind and road undulations and find straight though one tooth gaps too narrow.At the lowerend I can tolerate a wider OC against gravity.

Do 11 speed parts wear faster than 9 speed parts (for example). If they do, I don't notice and seem to change chains at about the same mileage. I've never had to replace a sprocket or a chainring in the 8 years I've been riding the bikes I acquired then when I sold all my old racing bikes. I put this down to a care bordering on paranoia about chain cleanliness and wear. 0.75 on the chain checker (used frequently) and it's off, even if it might have another 500 miles in it.

My 10sp MTB chain lasted 1500miles and was changed at 0.75% to save the cassette,from my understanding and experience 10sp > do wear quicker more so on 1x and 2x drivetrains especially in hilly terrain where the full range of gears are used and where they're cross chained frequently.
Someone like yourself who looks after their drivetrain and is mindful of the problems of crosschaining may get more mileage out it,but <9sp systems run thicker wider chains and thicker sprockets coupled with a triple for a wider range of gearing crosschaining is less with more robust drivetrain parts.
Another point with 1x11 systems is that the chainring will wear faster than 2x or 3x systems when used properly.

What I object to (apart from the planned obsolescence and fashion things) is the failure of Shimano et al to provide the gear ratios I want in a single integrated component set. Like you I feel that 11 and 12 sprockets (and 13 really) are redundant to all cyclists other than very fast racing fellows. Like you I regret the demise of the triple chainset. I have to buy two cassettes to make the one I want and there's always one sprocket jump where the indexing is a bit hesitant as a result of making the Frankenstein cassette, not to mention a few spurious bits of cassette in my bike bit cupboard.

Agreed,the silly 11 and 12 cogs are useless and inefficient and their wide range cassettes have yawning gaps in the mid range cruising ratios,so like you 2 cassettes make one with spare sprockets in a box(see my posts about it on the Alpine double thread)

Just in case Mr Shimano is reading I will state that I would like 9, 10 and 11 speed cassettes that start at 14 or 15 and go to 30, 32 or 36. And triple chainsets in all the ranges. So there.

Cugel

If only

[Scunnered]

I have to buy two cassettes to make the one I want and there's always one sprocket jump where the indexing is a bit hesitant as a result of making the Frankenstein cassette, not to mention a few spurious bits of cassette in my bike bit cupboard.

Just in case Mr Shimano is reading I will state that I would like 9, 10 and 11 speed cassettes that start at 14 or 15 and go to 30, 32 or 36. And triple chainsets in all the ranges. So there.
Cugel

I too have been down this road, but buying 2x cassettes and mixing sprockets is not ideal.
However, while the available combination of sprockets on a standard cassette is not what I want, you can get a 1x chainring with almost any number of teeth. Thus a 1x drivetrain offers the advantage that I can easily choose a chainring + cassette to give gear ratios that suit my requirements, without having the useless gears that you usually end up with at the top and bottom end of a 2x drivetrain. A 11-32 or 12-36 cassette will result in 30-90 or 35-100 gear inches with reasonable spacing when combined with a 38, 40 or 42t chainring.
In addition, chainline ends up being better as you have the most used sprockets in the centre of the cassette.

[reohn2]

I have to buy two cassettes to make the one I want and there's always one sprocket jump where the indexing is a bit hesitant as a result of making the Frankenstein cassette, not to mention a few spurious bits of cassette in my bike bit cupboard.

Just in case Mr Shimano is reading I will state that I would like 9, 10 and 11 speed cassettes that start at 14 or 15 and go to 30, 32 or 36. And triple chainsets in all the ranges. So there.
Cugel

I too have been down this road, but buying 2x cassettes and mixing sprockets is not ideal.
However, while the available combination of sprockets on a standard cassette is not what I want, you can get a 1x chainring with almost any number of teeth. Thus a 1x drivetrain offers the advantage that I can easily choose a chainring + cassette to give gear ratios that suit my requirements, without having the useless gears that you usually end up with at the top and bottom end of a 2x drivetrain. A 11-32 or 12-36 cassette will result in 30-90 or 35-100 gear inches with reasonable spacing when combined with a 38, 40 or 42t chainring.
In addition, chainline ends up being better as you have the most used sprockets in the centre of the cassette.

It's the progression of ratios that are too wide in the middle and higher ratios that are the problem for me,and a 30 to 90inch range is too high.
Currently on my 24/39t Alpine double I have 20 to 78inch range with narrow gaps mid and higher end in both rings and because the 39 is in the middle ring position crosschaining is minimal and the progression is easier on my old body .

If I were fitter(and lighter) I'd revert to the triples I've ridden for a looonnnggg time 24/34/46t(fitter still and the big ring would be a 48t or 50t) with the same custom 14,15,17,19,21,23,25or26,28or30,32or34t cassette,as it is for the time being at least the Alpine doubles are serving me well

[Cugel]

I have to buy two cassettes to make the one I want and there's always one sprocket jump where the indexing is a bit hesitant as a result of making the Frankenstein cassette, not to mention a few spurious bits of cassette in my bike bit cupboard.

Just in case Mr Shimano is reading I will state that I would like 9, 10 and 11 speed cassettes that start at 14 or 15 and go to 30, 32 or 36. And triple chainsets in all the ranges. So there.
Cugel

I too have been down this road, but buying 2x cassettes and mixing sprockets is not ideal.
However, while the available combination of sprockets on a standard cassette is not what I want, you can get a 1x chainring with almost any number of teeth. Thus a 1x drivetrain offers the advantage that I can easily choose a chainring + cassette to give gear ratios that suit my requirements, without having the useless gears that you usually end up with at the top and bottom end of a 2x drivetrain. A 11-32 or 12-36 cassette will result in 30-90 or 35-100 gear inches with reasonable spacing when combined with a 38, 40 or 42t chainring.
In addition, chainline ends up being better as you have the most used sprockets in the centre of the cassette.

My ideal range for a road bike and the cycling I do on it is 50 or 52 X 14 or 15 for top gear and 34 or 30 X 32 or 34 or 36 for bottom. In other words, I like ratios from around 3.7 (top) to 1 or just under (bottom). This with 28 - 32mm tyres.

In practice, the highest and lowest get used much less than the middle range. 52X14 might get used in a sprint for a village sign or when doing through and off down a slowly descending river valley road with a stiff following wind. At 100rpm it's going about 30mph. 30X32 might get used going up the Kingsdale climb, which is infested with black arrows.

A 30/39/52 triple chainset is my ideal as I can spend most time in the 39 ring from which all the sprockets of the cassette may be used with no unacceptable degree of cross chaining. It's a bit like having a single ring chainset with two other rings for the more extreme conditions. It covers around 10mph to 22mph at 100rpm (and slower speeds if I drop the cadence a bit to, say, 80rpm when climbing).

To get such a total gear range with only a single ring would mean, though, big gaps in the cassette sprockets. I like one tooth gaps at the high gear end so I have cassettes such as:

14-15-16-17-19-21-24-28-32-36
15-16-17-18-19-20-21-24-27-30
14-15-16-17-18-19-20-21-24-28-32

At the low speed end I don't mind the big jumps in teeth as low speed generally means climbing and climbing seems to allow one to employ a much wider cadence range. At the fast end a two tooth gap often makes the change between the two less than ideal for keeping the watts at just enough to hang on to that wheel in front!

Cugel