But 50x12 is the same as 46x11 with the benefit of a lighter and cheaper cassette (and RD if it causes them to make it bigger for the larger easier gear). I feel like 11T is a good compromise on smallest cog.
Gravel bikes really are what the average person (not average competitive user) should be using regarding gearing, geometry, and tire sizes.
Gravel bikes really are what the average person (not average competitive user) should be using regarding gearing, geometry, and tire sizes.
Basically sub-compact road gearing. I would strongly prefer if they offered it with road chainline.
Internal cable routing is also contributing to the death of cable shifting. The tight bends needed to route through the bar/stem/headset add a ton of friction and wear, which combined with tight tolerances for 12/13 speed systems make it really hard to get consistently precise shifting. Not to mention the added headache of running shift cables as well as a brake hose.
I’m no fan of internal routing, but that’s definitely where new road and gravel bikes are headed, so component makers are catering to it. I’d bet GRX 12s is the last high end cable actuated group.
From a drag / wear perspective I’d rather have a slightly physically larger chainring / cassette combination. Plus 50x34 chainring combination keeps the same BCD as a full size 53/42 or 52/36.
I was suprises by how much I like the 52 on my new bike, as my last bike was a 50 and I never felt like I needed faster (but my new bike is faster also). But in reality, 50 is huge for the vast majority and at times I have even thought the GRX on my gravel could be lower 
Goes without saying, but road and mountain use a different shifting mechanism/body. I’m not an engineer, but just passing along what those from Shimano stated in an interview
If I could get this cassette, I’d go to 54/40 chain rings in a second (my daily driver is 52/36 with 11-30 cassette).
They are Shimano, they are conservative. I’d ask the question: will they offer 1x for proper road bikes? SRAM officially gives you the option, Shimano does not (except on gravel bikes, but even there their offerings are lackluster in terms of e. g. choice of chain rings).
Also, will Shimano offer even wider gearing?
I think 13 or 14. The reason is that 1x13 gives you close enough gearing to mimic 2x11. I would love to have an extra cog and a 10–39 cassette on my aero road bike.
No, I think that’s the wrong approach: you should make the chain rings smaller instead and make a 10-tooth cog. That makes it easier to offer range, which is what people need. Any loss in efficiency is completely academic for the vast, vast majority of customers. I have a 42:10 as my hardest gear, which is a tad harder than 50:12. It worked very well for me.
The real issue IMHO are climbing gears. So many people would benefit from sub 1:1 gearing. (I am aware that this is possible now with e. g. 34:36 = 0.94 on Shimano, but I am thinking of 0.8 or even easier, “mountain bike gearing”.)
Yeah, but larger cogs make that harder, not easier, no? Plus, mountain biking is a lot tougher on components than road riding. Chain retention and exact shifts when riding offroad is just much more difficult than on smooth road surfaces.
It helps to remember that Shimano was late with 12-speed drivetrains on the mountain bike side, too, especially 1x.
If memory serves, when they brought out XTR M9000 (the last 11-speed mountain bike drivetrain), they would strongarm reviewers to use that drivetrain in a 2x configuration. (I think @angryasian recounted a story to that effect on Escape Collective’s excellent Geek Warning podcast.) And they stuck to 11 sprockets in the rear even though the market had moved on. SRAM, on the other hand, has had many more years with 12 speed drivetrains on the mountain bike side especially, but also for road groupsets. And now the bill came due.
12 speeds is fine. It’s been fine for years.
Don’t forget Rotor who sold (past tense?) a 13-/12-speed groupset. (For 13 speeds you needed to get their Revolver hub.) I heard from someone well-known in the industry that Rotor’s groupset was, in their testing at least, problematic. The new Apex also has a mechanical variant.
Perhaps the added complication might be front shifting actually, now shifts in the rear.
I have Ekar and i love it… but it is a full time job keeping on top of the indexing. I’d love an electronic version.
Think this would take the total rechargeable battery count on some of my bikes to 9! 2 x shifters, 2 x derailleurs, head unit, front and rear lights, left and right pedals. If (or let’s be honest when) I upgrade to this I might have to build up a single speed with dynamo lights just so I have at least one bike I can still call simple
I wonder how much the marketing dept designed this vs engineers/cyclists. The Sram vs shimano peacocking is getting downright comical
It’s getting to the point where the “2nd tier” Chinese group sets are actually a viable option. Sensah, ltwoo, magene are all making options that may not have the fit and finish but if you’re on a budget, these really dont suck anymore. 5 years ago, no one in their mind would consider these, now, at least at the lower end, these guys are legit fighting for marketshare. I can’t help but feel like the added 13 speeds is their way of differentiating themselves, when the reality is is that they already make a freakin amazing drivetrain and simply working so well is already the reason people love shimano
I can’t ever imagine looking at SRAMs batteries and calling it a win.
Maybe. I think I’d still pick 105 Di2 over a Chinese group. Still too many issues and way less support. But give them 4-5 years and a couple iterations and they’ll be super competitive. It’s just hard to go that route right now when you can find 105 groups for $700-800. I paid around $400 for a 105 Di2 mini group a few months back. They’ll have to be a substantial price difference to get a lot of people to make the jump.
Absolutely agree, I’m talking more from the oem standpoint
along with disposable blips. You’ve got to be kidding me SRAM!
A Shimano rep spilled the beans to the lead mechanic at my LBS and said Di2 XTR with battery on the mech late this year. So wireless between the shifter and mech. No mention of speeds though.
Seriously? Beats the hell out of wired with the battery buried in the frame. Fully modular and swappable between derailleurs, last forever, I’ve never had issues with connection failures even in very wet conditions. Does anyone really prefer current Di2 setup in terms of battery/wire layout?
Layout and wires? No. Battery life. 100% yes as it’s crazy long.
