Mountain Biking - A dark day in the mountain bike world...

http://www.bikemagic.com/news/images/SL-R770_big.jpg

10 speed mtb drivetrain. How much thinner is the chain going to be now?

Are those cases metal? If they are thats awesome, I've only ever seen plastic.

Whats the point? Just go sram and dont ever deal with shimano. Shimano seems to be drifting more to XC.

Yucky.

Ahh, the days of the 10 Speed are finally coming back.... Although this really means 30 Speed actually....

Dont you realize that this means thinner, weaker chains, and worse shifting quality?

Is it really that surprising? We knew that it was coming...eventually.

It is probably plastic. Since it is an XC component, they would probably try to keep the weight down.

hahahaha...I knew it! I best go spend 2g and upgrade to my 30 speed drivetrain...NOT...27 is plenty enough.

All I need is 8 :rolleyes:

8 works too...heck even a 3 speed would work...I just need my 24/32 32/11 and 44/11

All I need is one.

All I need is one.

Testify!

One gear, no waiting!

Seriously, my god. But, I guess we should have seen it coming when the Dura-Ace went ten speed.

http://www.bikemagic.com/news/images/SL-R770_big.jpg

10 speed mtb drivetrain. How much thinner is the chain going to be now?
That's nothing. They have a patent on a 14 speed setup.
The SL-R770 shifters are Rapidfire Plus units for Shimano's 10-speed road groups. They're intended for flat-bar road bikes though some nut will jump the gun and build something to run offroad before they release the real MTB stuff.

The news lots of people have been waiting for, though, is the arrival of new, "Top-Normal" rear derailleurs for Deore, LX and XT. While conventionally-sprung mechs have continued to be available, they've been from earlier incarnations of the groupsets so haven't really matched in terms of colour, design or graphics. The new ones have been restyled for a more coherent look. You won't get the oversized, wide-link design of the Low Normal equivalents, but if you can't (or won't) reprogram your shifting brain that won't bother you in the slightest. The LX and XT mechs will be available in long or mid-cage lengths.

Why in the hell would you possibly ever need a 42 speed drive train?? Thats just stupid.

Why in the hell would you possibly ever need a 42 speed drive train?? Thats just stupid.
Don't ask me, but the patent exists. I'm looking it up now

Not that I completely agree with it but...


I still feel that variable gears are only for people over forty-five. Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles than by the artifice of a derailleur? We are getting soft... As for me, give me a fixed gear!

How much thinner is the chain going to be now?

Probably about 10-11%.

I love you you forever sram ....

I love you you forever sram ....
What about when they come out with 14 speed?

as long as they keep 8 or 9 I don't care (really the same for shimano too)....otherwise...if both go larger gear ranges...

I love you roholff forever...

I have no company loyalty ;)

Time to start buying NOS and stock-piling it!

All I need is 8 :rolleyes:

Is it not true that having a single ring in the front is the worst possible setup for chain wear. So your 8 or 9 speed certainly won't help preserve the chain. Good usage of a 27 speed setup, will preserve a chain better than a 8-9 speed setup.

Go SRAM :). And to combat this great evil, theres the x.0 triggers

there is a picture of a 14 speed cassette in last months or the month before last bicycling magazine. It was a short article but it said it uses a special type of chain, and not just because its a lot thinner.

Is it not true that having a single ring in the front is the worst possible setup for chain wear. So your 8 or 9 speed certainly won't help preserve the chain. Good usage of a 27 speed setup, will preserve a chain better than a 8-9 speed setup.

I dont do XC and need that range of gears. Besides my chain sucks and a new SRAM can be found for 14 bucks. :rolleyes: Just another excuse to upgrade. When everything is worn out and done for, Im going all SRAM. :D:D

My derrailuer is being ******** since it's bounced around so much; the spring is loosened. I'm wondering if it's feasible to make it a single speed on this frame...

I love SS plus it's the easiest on the chain.

I dont do XC and need that range of gears. Besides my chain sucks and a new SRAM can be found for 14 bucks. :rolleyes: Just another excuse to upgrade. When everything is worn out and done for, Im going all SRAM. :D:D

This is correct. I ride XC and don't use need 9 or 27. Who cares if the chain lasts longer? It is the cheapest part of the drivetrain and should be changed on a regular basis. I am going back to 8 when cold weather rolls back around. I think 7-8 is more than enough for and trail riding, and if you disagree your wrong or weak.

I love SS plus it's the easiest on the chain.
How is SS easier? It is harder on cogs and rings and from what I hear the chain too. I don't really care because a SS is my favorite bike.

No lateral flex to wear the plates out prematurely. But yes the chains wear a bit quicker and are hard on the rings and cogs.

I agree you don't need that many gears. I run a double on the front of my Santa Cruz and still have 8 spd in the rear.

However. . . all this talk about problems with the chain and wear are the same talks that people were having when they tried to go from 6 to 7, 7 to 8 and so on and so on.

They do need to stop at some point, though.

Is it not true that having a single ring in the front is the worst possible setup for chain wear.

Presuming that there should be a question mark at the end of that sentence, my answer is no. Why would it be?

If I replace the chain on my bike (8 speed cassette), do I need to buy a specific chain thats made for only 8 speed bikes?

If I replace the chain on my bike (8 speed cassette), do I need to buy a specific chain thats made for only 8 speed bikes?

Yes, pretty much any chain that isn't a 9 speed or singlespeed.

Presuming that there should be a question mark at the end of that sentence, my answer is no. Why would it be?

There is more wear because there is more torque on a SS all the time. With a mulit-geared bike the chain gets a rest period.

find stuff on this 14 speed stuff people! i am more than interested! haha

There is more wear because there is more torque on a SS all the time. With a mulit-geared bike the chain gets a rest period.

'Splain, please. Coasting's coasting, isn't it?

'Splain, please. Coasting's coasting, isn't it?

When your in a lower gear the chain isn't under as much stress as you turn the crank. On a singlespeed the chain is always under more load because it is always in a higher gear. The stress of standing more is another problem. That is of course if you have a SS with a 32x32 gear.

32x32!? That's a retardedly low gear.. you could only go like 10 mph :/

At 100rpm thats 7.5 mph :D

it's a good way to practice spinning and patience i suppose.

or a 24x24!!!!!!! lol a 1:1 cog ratio

or a 24x24!!!!!!! lol a 1:1 cog ratio

ummmm.........I think thats what they were discussing previously

There is more wear because there is more torque on a SS all the time. With a mulit-geared bike the chain gets a rest period.

Feltup, are you thinking of a fixed gear single speed? In that case, the chain has to bear loads from braking as well as from pedaling, so you may be right. For a freehub singlespeed, however, there should actually be less stress on the chain than on a multispeed because it doesn't have to 1) be shifted from cog to cog and 2) the chainline is uniform and consistent so the chain doesn't have to bear off-axis loads.

Feltup, are you thinking of a fixed gear single speed? In that case, the chain has to bear loads from braking as well as from pedaling, so you may be right. For a freehub singlespeed, however, there should actually be less stress on the chain than on a multispeed because it doesn't have to 1) be shifted from cog to cog and 2) the chainline is uniform and consistent so the chain doesn't have to bear off-axis loads.

What? No I am talking about a SS bike. You have more "stretch" on a SS because there is more force on the chain. Example---- I run a 36x18 on my SS. I climb hills in this gear. I must stand a lot to get over hills. This puts a lot of stress on the chain and if you have a tensioner can cause the chain to slip because of the high torque. Now with a multi-speed bike you have a lower gear, say a 32x30. There is less torque on the chain because the ratio is closer. You shouldn't need to stand as much with a multi-speed bike, this means less stress on the chain.

I think your logic is flawed. A 450 lb rider running the crossed over small/small combo will break a chain before a 120 lb rider pushing a 48/11 SS. Bike chains, by design, are their strongest when loaded in a straight line, as on a single speed. It's the lateral deflection caused by multispeed cassettes and shifting that wears them out.

Essentially, riding style has more to do with chain wear than whether the bike is single or multi-speed.

Yes but ...

... seaee aour amps gou to eleven. No oun else haas an amp luike dthat.

Pure marketing. 10 is better than 9 just like 9 is better than eleven. This SHOULD be the point where Shimano throws in and makes a 1.2:1 shift ratio so the thing can be tuned without knowing the air temperature and humidity. Of course, they couldn't possibly make 1:1 equipment because than SRAM stuff would be compatible and you know that Shimano doesn't take kindly to compatible equipment.

Regarding the width of the chain, this only becomes a problem when you match it up with all those legacy chainrings. A thinner chain is likely to "rub" against the teeth. Expect Shimano to release special 10-speed chain rings to accomodate the issue.

Meanwhile the very people that this stuff is targeted to (XC racers) will shun the use of the top and bottom cog of their cassette completely complaining of excessive stiffness in the chain. In the true sense of irony, they will be riding 8 speeds again just with thinner chain shields and cassette cogs.

8 works too...heck even a 3 speed would work...I just need my 24/32 32/11 and 44/11

Well said, people overemphasize the NUMBER of gears over the RANGE of gears. The single-speeders have proven without a doubt that your legs are more than ample to handle small changes in load. What you need from gears is to handle LARGE changes.

I don't get those itty bitty cassettes that look like cones. Whats the point of such small gear changes?? Seems to me that you're just wasting time shifting if all you getting is a single tooth one way or the other.

This is correct. I ride XC and don't use need 9 or 27. Who cares if the chain lasts longer? It is the cheapest part of the drivetrain and should be changed on a regular basis. I am going back to 8 when cold weather rolls back around. I think 7-8 is more than enough for and trail riding, and if you disagree your wrong or weak.

If 7-8 gears are enough for you, then the trails you ride are not varied enough. World class riders use 27 gears, so please don't bring the "weak" argument here. Only the very best riders go with 2 front rings (18 speed) occasionally - and usually they do it if the course allows it.