roccobike

This debate backs up what I'm seeing at rides. There is no big push amongst hobbyists to go to 11 speed. I remember when 10 came out how there were discussions about upgrading a bike to 10 speed from 9 or 8 and a fair number of folks made the switch because it wasn't too expensive. More recently some folks were considering upgrading to electronic 10 speed when it arrived. By contrast, no one I've run into is even thinking about going to 11 and most don't care. Even the folks who bought new bikes said they like the new electronic shifting, but could care less about the number of gears.
For me, I did feel a difference when I went from 7 to 8 (both had brifters) and liked it. I thought 8 to 9 was a slight improvement. I only went to 10 because I went to full carbon and that's how the bike came. But I've got no new road bikes in my future so I don't see me going to 11, ever.
On the MTBs, I have top quality 9 speed, and I'm staying with it. The problem is, if I go to a new 29er, I'll probably be stuck with a 10 speed because that's how they build them, but it wouldn't be my choice for an MTB.
Just my $.02.

Bholio

When I moved from 7 (or 8?) to 9 on my mountain bike, my first reaction was 'There always seems to be another gear where I need it!', and I liked it. The fact that my shifters are part of my brake handles (and laziness) is what has stopped me from removing the front shifting altogether. I live in a 'rolling hills' type area, so no huge climbing or descending, so I always stay in the middle ring up front.

I can't see how they can keep physically jamming more gears in the back cassette. But, I can imagine a 2 speed IGH, coupled with an 10 speed cassette, with coordination of both systems done electronically to be an interesting possibility. Rather than 2 or 3 sets of 10, which we have now with dual derailleurs, an electronic system can present 2x10 as a single 20 gear range, with less chain wrangling than trying to do the same with multiple derailleurs.

The industry can start over counting with 2 in the IGH. Increment to 3 in a few years. They can milk that bad boy for decades. Keep working on the weight of the IGH while adding more internal gears. 11 speed cassette and 14 speed IGH for a computer controlled 154 incrementally taller gears. Lots of room for innovation/sales here, just in the management of that many gears.

Once they go to CVT, they can't add any more, and no one will ever upgrade, except to decrease weight or catch a new high or low ratio.

My 1970s road bike has 2x6 gears, someone upgraded it in the past from 5. I wish it had a few more teeth on the large gear in the back sometimes for when I am tired. I don't know what the numbers are on it.

Uncle Randy

All I'm saying is that might be the "hook" people are looking for.

ThermionicScott 

Sure, and if they pedal once in a while, that's certainly better than nothing. But I'm still gonna judge.

LesterOfPuppets

I went to a demo event and rode a couple of MTBs with 1x11. It was REALLY nice.

My current MTB lineup is one 2x9, and two 3x8s, though. I'm not itching to upgrade cog counts at all.

alex jb

great debate guys!

I have a 1 x 9 MTB, does everything I need. 1 x 10 gravel grinder, has all the ratio I need.
Only place I could see me using a 13 is on my TT rig, I have 2x10 right now with 53/39 and a 12-27, i can always find the right ratio to keep the cadence/power right for longer races, I don't think I'd have that with the single ring and 10sp 11-34 casette from the gravel bike.
With a TT rig less likely to get filthy and I don't put as many miles on it either, I would likely consider a 13cog casette, I'm no fan of front shifting!