seypat

I'm not the one hyping a product like a carny barker telling everyone that's willing to listen how superior it is..........yet not willing to use/purchase the product himself. If you had one and put up a review saying the same things, people might take you more seriously. But, as it is, you just sound like a snake oil salesman roaming from town to town on a Gypsy Wagon.

Eric F 

I'm not so sure, man. There are a lot of things that I think are superior to what I have. I just can't afford them

DaveSSS 

My 30/32 and 30/36 are both lower than what can be had with the classified hub (and the 50T chainring to match my 46/10). The classified cassettes must be used.

I use 46/30 grx cranks specifically, to get more low gear than a 46/33 SRAM crank offers. It works perfectly with SRAM 12. The 33/46 = .72 lacks range.

PeteHski

Maybe you haven't read my previous replies fully. I was talking conceptually, as in hub shift vs multiple chainrings and FD. The main reason I'm not riding with a Classified Hub at this point is high cost and limited wheelset/cassette options. But none of that changes the conceptual argument. In reality I'll probably be riding 1x next time around and then the whole range shift problem disappears. Maybe it will be a 1x13/14/15? We're nearly at the point where front or hub shifting would be obsolete for most uses - as it practically is now in mtb.

PeteHski

I'll just pop you on my troll list. I can't be a snake oil salesman if I'm not selling anything.

seypat

It's a free country. Do as you wish.

PeteHski

Thanks for clarifying.

Koyote

That's part of my point: cost is an important element when comparing these options.

And PeteHski himself acknowledges the limited cassette and wheelset options.

PeteHski

Of course cost is important. But it doesn't change the conceptual arguments and hub shifting would become much cheaper if it was more mainstream. At the moment it's a no-contest on cost, which is why we all make do with FDs.

seypat

I'll say it again:

PeteHski

Nobody cares

PeteHski

Often the issue with new tech. But doesn’t change the fact that FDs are conceptually limited. It’s the reason why engineers are looking for alternative, inherently better solutions.

seypat

Evidently they do, or you wouldn't have conceded and made this statement.

BTW, I agree with your statements about hub shifting concepts but it's not there yet. It's not there with the Rolhoff, or the IGH. It's not there with this product yet either. It will probably will at some point, but not currently.

tomato coupe

Nope. The classified hub can give you the equivalent of a 28/34 or 27/34.

Koyote

You’re like a dog with a bone.

big john

You could get a Pinion transmission. It's a 12 speed planetary transmission contained in the bottom bracket. 600% range, but a bit heavy.

DaveSSS 

Without losing top gear?

If I want a 50/11 top gear, all you can get is 50/34x0.7= 1.03. That's nothing special.

If a 40 chain ring is used, then 40x 0.7 = 28. Then top gear is a useless 40/11.

tomato coupe

Your post was very clearly about the low end gearing.

PeteHski

Maybe it's just because I'm a mechanical design engineer. As long as I can remember I have been underwhelmed with the whole derailleur gear change concept on bikes, although continual development over the past 40 years has greatly improved it, especially at the rear. But the FD always strikes me as something that could be replaced by something inherently better and maybe we are finally going to see that happen over the next decade. Both with 1x and/or hub gears.

I would be surprised if the pros are racing with FDs in another 10 years, but I suppose that depends mainly on what direction Shimano/SRAM decide to go.

DaveSSS 

I'm a mechanical engineer too. I haven't had the FD shifting problems that many others have and yes, I use riding techniques that help to overcome common shifting problems that others complain about. SRAM AXS has a compensating mode that takes care of sprocket shifting after a chainring shift. I don't use it because I would almost never be grinding away in the big ring and suddenly decide to shift to the little ring. I do set a 2-sprocket limit on multi-shifts. If I really want some compensating shifting, all I have to do is hold the shift lever and it shifts two sprockets. I deliberately use the largest range at the crank, since it really doesn't require much sprocket shifting, if ridden effectively.

I like SRAM 10-36 or 10-33 cassettes for their large range. A cassette that starts with an 11 would need a 40T largest sprocket to match the range of a 10-36. If that much range isn't needed, I have 10-33 cassettes that gives me back the 14T sprocket missing from the 10-36. I notice that Shimano added a 11-36 12 speed cassette to match SRAM's lowest road sprocket, but their smallest chain ring is a 34. To get more range from my SRAM drivetrain, I use a Shimano GRX 46/30 crank. I can match the range of a Shimano 11-36 with my 10-33.

rudypyatt

I am not familiar with the Classified hub. How does it differ from what Sturmey-Archer has offered for decades with a hybrid drivetrain? Even now, Sturmey offers a three speed hub for which you can thread an eight or nine speed cassette onto the drive side: 24 to 27 gears without overlapping, and a clean 1x climbing solution.

PeteHski

I tried the auto-compensating mode with SRAM AXS and didn't like it at all. Too much crunching on the cassette when trying to get back on the power quickly - like at the foot of a steep climb following a downhill. So I soon went back to independent front and rear shifting to avoid that. I also have the 2-sprocket multi-shift limit setup, but rarely use that function.

My SRAM AXS has a 10-33 cassette, with 35/48T chaninrings. That gives a pretty decent range for 99% of my riding. No complaints there really. But still the whole FD concept is fundamentally weak in my view. But at least road biking is by far the least demanding of front shifting, so much less of an issue than it was with mountain biking. I'm pretty sure that's why FDs rapidly disappeared from modern mountain bikes after 1x arrived on the scene.

PeteHski

Good question and I don't know the answer. I suspect it's mainly Classified's focus on high-end lightweight road use. I presume the Sturmey-Archer system is much heavier. Also not sure about the torque limit with Sturmey-Archer? May or may not be an issue for high performance users.

Just Googling now I see the Classified Hub is already finding it's way into the pro peloton. Also some interesting pro/con points raised in this article

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cla...n-pro-peloton/

*Note: for all the cynical people, I have no link with Classified and don't give a **** whether or not you choose to spend £1000 on it!

seypat

Got to admit, your passion for your cause is right up there with the people on the Waxing thread. You should however, refrain from calling the rest of the posters on the thread a word that the mods might think is vulgar. I'd consider an edit.

msu2001la

Some teams run 1x for the flatter classic races now. Also a lot of TT bikes are going 1x for flatter courses.

Trek Segafredo ran 54T front rings with 10-36 cassettes at Paris Roubaix and a few other races in 2022. The benefits they cited are a straighter chainline and less chance of chain drop on the cobbled sectors of the race - further helped by the K-Edge chain guide. Looks like a narrow-wide chainring, and that SRAM AXS RD is clutched/damped to eliminate chain slap and bounce.

Pretty sure the Shimano teams are still all on 2x for these races, which probably has to do more with being "sponsor correct" than anything else.



Edit - it actually looks like a few Shimano teams did run 1x as well. Total Energies had a few bikes with XTR and GRX derailleurs this year: