KCNC, the component company, has road 12 sp in their 2012 catalog. There are pictures of 12sp cassettes, and drawings of new derailleurs and shifters. The cassettes fit on current Sram/shimano freehubs. No chain is shown. They did not show 12sp at Interbike.

Would you get 12sp if it came out?

I would love to have more gearing choices. But I'd probably wait to see if it was reliable first. KCNC makes some innovative parts but they sometimes don't perform as well as I would like. And I have a stash of 10sp stuff so I'm in no hurry to make it all obsolete.

They also have MTB 11sp in the same catalog.

Would you get 13 speed? 14? 15? 20?
At what point would you decide that the chain has become too thin to still be reliable enough?
Do you really need that 11th or 12th extra cog on your cassette?
Do you really notice an improvement of your shifting with 9 speed versus 10 speed?
Or are you simply surfing along on the big market hype here?

Perhaps it is just me...I went from 9 to 10, and just find myself changing gears much more trying to find that "spot" again. I could see it being nice for a wide range mountain cassette, but otherwise its just going to be one less tooth somewhere more or less.

You ever read Catch 22? Remember the part where the gung ho drill sargeant was allowed to schedule parades as long as he cancelled them before they happened?

This also applies to DoH!2 (Di2).

There is a point where the advancement of a system no longer makes sense. I roll on 8 speed through 10, and find 9 speed to be the sweet spot. I rode a 2x5 ten speed in the 70's. It was fine for my paper route, my youthful legs and pre-smoking lungs. Improving a product to a point where it is simply 'the next big thing/gadget' is a waste, IMHO, but a company has to stay in business. Gimmicks and pitches.

1x14, if you could get around cross chaining issues could be pretty cool. Less complex and presumably lighter than a 2x20 setup, and 14 gears could give you a pretty reasonable range without huge gaps.

Supposedly Shimano has a patent on a 14 speed system.

Remember the T.V. Show "Eight is Enough?" I am old enough to...

I think 8 is enough and 10 is certainly enough, but sounds like they keep wanting to push the envelope.

They do need to sell more stuff every year to stay in business.

sounds like we're getting closer to a Constant Velocity Transmission found in newer cars - instead of shifting gears, it's a conical implemenation where torque management is met by differing the cone (much like a cassette) - imaging dialing in a knob (or even computer monitored) to dial in your wattage preferences when climbing a hill - would be pretty amazing if you ask me...

instead of clunking into a gear, just smoothly transition your cadence/wattage to meet your physique!

Old news https://www.fallbrooktech.com/08_bicycle_n360.asp

The idea of cone and belt type gears is certainly not new and is widely used in small mopeds for decades, but it's always going to be heavier and have more friction than a chain and sprocket type transmission.
For casul people riding bikes I can see a huge market here if the system can be produced at the same cost as the current systems.
For racers, however, it'll have to weigh no more than the current systems and it'll have to have no more friction either.

I don't see the practical use of cramming N+1 sprockets onto a wheel. Theoretically you could squeeze 20 or more wafer-thin sprockets on there, but you'd never keep the shifting properly set up and would be replacing chains and sprockets at ridiculously low intervals. Past 8 or 9-speed, is there really that much of an improvement to justify the extra wear and tear and general 'fiddlyness' of the system?

I think we're at the point where getting more gears requires a design rethink rather than continually thinning down sprockets and adding wheel dish. Rohloff make a wide-ranging 14-speed |IGH, but this seems to be shunned on road bikes for some reason. For a wide range of closely spaced gears, CVT in the hub seems to be the way to go IMHO.

Better gear selection is the reason for more cogs on the cassette. For any given range, you can have more gearing choices and/or smaller gaps between cogs.

For example:

10-speed Campy 12-27 cassette: 12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,24,27

11-speed Campy 12-27 cassette: 12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,23,25,27

See that 3 tooth jump on the last three cogs? Maybe it's not a big deal, but absolutely worth it to me to have a smoother jump to the next higher/lower cog.

Or, maybe, you're in love with an 18T cog, and want to add that instead, without giving something else up. It's more possible to do that with more cogs, in'n't it?

Forget, for a moment, that Campy doesn't actually make a 10-spd 12-27 cassette, and that the above example is from Miche.

I believe that's continuously variable transmission...

Some reasons: 1) expense, 2) efficiency ( or lack thereof), 3 weight, 4) complexity, and 5) don't integrate well with brifters.

All good and well but my Shimano 10 speed 11-23 cassette has 11-12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23
I don't see an 11 or 12 speed 11-23 cassette being all that much nicer.
I never need a lower gear than 39/23 ... I simply HTFU and go up 20% cobblestone hills in that gear.

operative word

I know I don't have any actual mountains around here.

DScott - I totally agree. As a tall (and thus heavy) rider who spends a lot of time climbing, I appreciate the lower gearing offered by compact cranksets but to get back the top gears for descents, I have to go to an 11t cog. Losing that 16t cog in the middle and having (yet) another multi-tooth jump in gearing is definitely felt.

Even switching between my 7900 11-25 and my 7900 11-27 (which has 21-23-25 and 21-24-27 respectively) is noticeable. I look at campy 11speed cassettes and notice they can do those gear ranges with smaller or fewer multi-tooth steps and it makes me jealous a little bit.

I'd be all for it if they could eliminate the FD. otherwise, 10 is more than enough.

LOL yes, I was tired when i posted that

I've been speculating on 12spd ever since disk brakes were accepted as UCI approved on 135 rear for cross. Being so close to road can 135 for road be far behind?
So is the KCNC 12 spd for 135 ?
As chains become narrower and lighter they also seem to become more flexible, making cross chaining less of an issue.
And if I could single step myself all the way to 23 I'd be a happy rider.
Is 10 spd better than 9 spd? I wasn;t that sure some years back. But when I actually got a chance to really use 10 spd, there was no question for me that 10 spd is far superior in shifting, both up and down. No problems shifting while under full power, whereas 9 spd still complains a bit when shifting under stress.
None of this stops me from occasionally enjoying the old iron with 6 or 7 spd; but given the choice for a hard ride, I always go with the 10 spd.
Campy 11 may be even nicer - don;t know, haven't had the chance to try it.
12 spd on a 130 - I don;t see it... but on a 135 with disk brakes - where do I line up?

I think it's really a sort of 7sp with high and low, without duplicating gear ratios. Like a 7 sp cassette with 2 very wide spaced rings at the front.

*cough* 2013 sram *cough*

Campy's 11 speed 11-25 cassette looks perfect to me. I have a shimano 105 with 11-28 and it is a bit big in jumps towards the 28.