No. I think it’s realistically at least twice that and probably 3 times. I put that number as a hypothetical worst case scenario.
1 Like
Yes, but also with Shimano shirt may happen. Our team captain charged up his Di2 rig the day before a race, just to find his battery almost empty at the venue. Unfortunately, he didn’t have the charging cable with him, he had charged the battery the day before after all. He had to ask around until someone lent him a cable to allow him to top off his battery. With SRAM he either would have had to charge the battery (takes <= 1 hour in my experience) or pop in a spare.
How many things in your life are wired and remain wired? Vacuum cleaners, drills, electric wrenches, … Does you phone need a cable to connect to the internet? How about your laptop? Your printer?
Going wireless is inevitable. Shimano is doing it in baby steps. It is more flexible.
There are advantages to charging. One thing I wish is that devices would move away from coin cell batteries to rechargeable batteries. It’s basically the only thing I wish my Quarq would do differently. Although, to be fair, I have only changed batteries twice in a bit over 2 years.
Need is always such a tricky word. No, we don’t need it, but it works better. For pros who have mechanics to take care of their bikes, a lot of the disadvantages are moot. Who cares if they have to swap shifter cables?
But there are many advantages and things that simply wouldn’t be possible with mechanical groupsets. Just think of e. g. a TT bike, you can install shifters of your choice on the bars/bar ends and another pair of shifters (if you want) so that you can shift while braking.
You can install blips on the tops if that is your thing. You can trim your rear mech while riding (at least on SRAM). Those as all small things which are very nice-to-have. Necessary? Nope.
If 2 years ago SRAM had come out with an updated 12-speed Force 1 mechanical that was substantially cheaper than Force eTap AXS, I probably would have gone for that. What if the price difference were only $200? I probably would have paid that to get an electronic groupset.
The biggest issue with electronic groupsets right now is the price, not the tech, especially on the road side. (On the MTB side it actually isn’t as expensive.)
The second biggest issue with electronic groupsets is that failures tend to be binary: either it works perfectly or not at all. The latter might be very unlikely, but it can happen. With mechanical groupsets you very often have a degraded state (bad cables, etc.) where you can still shift, just very badly and/or not very reliably.
1 Like
I def don’t need wireless but god I’d love wireless.
2 Likes
Every week/500 km? Where did you get that from? That doesn’t match my experience at all. If anything, charging is so infrequent, that I tend to forget to charge proactively.
Battery life (of my rear mech) is measured in many weeks. I mostly ride on the trainer (in resistance mode, so I still shift a lot), so I don’t know how that translates into km. But way more than 500 km.
In my mind it is closer to 3 times that, I get way more than 2x (= 1,000 km) on a charge.
1 Like
By the way I‘m sorry if I turned the discussion to mechanical vs electronic groupsets. 
1 Like
I literally used those exact examples in my post…
1 Like
Wireless, electronic and mechanical all have their pros and cons. It happened multiple times that my Di2 battery was just dead when it showed a well charged battery day(s) before. Personally I prefer the way SRAM went with the swappable batteries.
Mind boggling how Campa came up with the idea of having two different batteries for front and rear mech. If this has to do with a patent, they should’ve just went with same batteries and fought in court. Not a lawyer obviously but here in the EU I believe they could have won a possible legal battle against SRAM. It just makes more sense for the consumers and the environment - two compelling arguments right now in the EU.
Imagine you need two different batteries, two different chargers and two different spares. How stupid is that?!
2 Likes
Ah ok, that’s good to hear. Still more often than I’d be up for charging it but I can see that it would be enough for some
My bike is wireless in the context of those examples!
My “wireless” drill has wires running from the trigger to the motor. My phone’s antenna is physically connected to the rest of the phone’s electronics. My bike’s handlebars are connected to the rest of the bike, and through those handlebars runs a little cable to the derailleurs. All of these items then get plugged into the wall to charge every now and then, but aren’t connected to an outlet when I’m actively using them. And in the case of my bike I plug it in about every 6 months which works well for me.
I think there’s lots of possible complaints with SR WL - if anyone wants a very long read, go to the Weightweenies thread on it - but, to my mind at least, the range (750-1000km) and the ratios are relative non-issues.
What do people think about the Sram-like ratios? I’m loving my current setup (52/36 and 11-32 11 speed). I was thinking that on my next 12 speed bike I’d get the same and have the 16 toothed cog back.
On Sram I think I’d go for 48/37 and the 10-33 cassette (no 16 but it’s kind of like having the 16 since with the 48, you are basically one smaller cog in every similar situations - the 15 now acts like the 16).
I’m not sure what gears I’d want on the new Campagnolo. They are going wider in the front than Sram. The Campy 48/32 and the 10-29 cassette maybe makes the most sense for me. It’s hard to wrap my brain about 45/29.
Your bike’s groupset is wireless in the same way that my NAS, which is connected to my WLAN router via an ethernet cable is wireless. 
Just look at where things are going: Shimano’s 12-speed Di2 shifters are wireless (although I understand they can be optionally plugged in). Shimano will get there, just years later than everyone else. At least Bluetooth connectivity is now included by default. (With 11-speed this was optional, and the reason I couldn’t try out the fancy shift modes on a long-term loaner.)
IMHO the bigger battery Shimano-style is useless. If Shimano allowed me to plug in e. g. lights, cycling computers and the like, then I’d be very interested in lugging a big battery around.
tl;dr
A 48/37 coupled to a 10–33 cassette will give you the same range and more ratios than your current setup (52/36 + 11–32), albeit with slightly larger gaps on the climby end. Similar comments apply to Campag’s new groupset.
SRAM ratios are great. You broadly get the same ratios with more reach. E. g. the setups you mentioned in your post look like this. As you can see, with the SRAM setup, you trade slightly larger gaps on the climby end (which I like) for more closely spaced gears at the top end.
You mentioned you don’t have a 16-tooth cog: Shimano’s 11–32 cassette does have a 16-tooth cog, but SRAM’s does not.
Some people find these ratios odd, simply because they aren’t used to them. But once you plug them in, you see that for the most part, they are virtually identical. In practice, you won’t feel a difference. E. g. the ratios my 10–36 cassette coupled to a 42-tooth chainring gives me feel virtually identical to a SRAM 11–32 cassette coupled to a 50-tooth chainring where I lop off the 11-tooth cog and add two cogs at the top end. In fact, that’s exactly how the math works out.
1 Like
The sram 48/37 makes sense now that I’ve studied it. Campy’s 48/32 and 45/29 are harder to wrap my brain around.
My biggest problem with compact gears is that I always liked doing that winter base miles pace in the 39 chainring. I tried 50/34 and didn’t care for it because I only used the 34 for climbing.
The 52/36 is kind of a compromise setup but honestly I’m mostly in the 52 now if the ground is flat. So maybe I just have to embrace the fact that I’d probably almost always be in a 48 unless it’s a climb.
1 Like
If you want the same top end ratios, then 48/32 + 10–29 will give you the same range and more ratios. If it weren’t for the exorbitant price, I’d say Campy’s setup is worth looking into. But you really have to want that new Super Record groupset.
Compared to the SRAM setup the Campag cassette is more tightly spaced at the climby end. That is because a Campy front shift will give you a chainring 16 teeth more or less, and SRAM will only result in a 13-tooth difference. Whether this is an issue depends on your preferences. I like larger jumps between climbing gears. But YMMV.
Practically speaking, you’ll be fine either way. You’ll get used to it.
Gearing is very personal. A 39-tooth chainring seems too large if you really want to climb. (Your gearing suggests that you are encountering proper climbs.)
Staying in the little ring during the base phase seems quite old school 
Maybe you can try different strategies to keep yourself in check. For most endurance rides I give myself HR max targets (e. g. <= 135 bpm or <= 140 bpm) to reign myself in.
1 Like
I agree, I have both 11 and 12s Shimano 52/36 11/30 both are excellent but I definitely notice the extra cog mid cassette.
I do like new tech despite being ‘middle aged’ but the new ‘compact’ ratios from sram and Campagnolo would constantly have me trying to translate to old school ratios…
Drivetrain friction testing shows that you’re generally better off in the big ring, unless you’re also in the 3-4 biggest cogs. I know they told all of us back then to stay in the 39 unless we were serious. That was old school practice, not tied to data. That said, it’s true that with 50 or 52 big rings, there’s a range of easy speeds where you’re either in big-big or you have to shift to small cog and go pretty far down the cassette. I’m talking speeds of 14-16 mph or so. On a Shimano setup, it feels like I have to upshift the rear many times if I enter the small ring. (Less so on my current Campy 12 setup, but that is 12s).
This is what I’m conflicted about. Theoretically, you definitely have slightly higher drivetrain friction with smaller rings and cassettes. That should translate to wear. But what’s the difference? In the smallest two cogs, it’s probably noticeable, but how often is anybody in those cogs? The Velonews article implies that the difference between 53/12 and 11 and 48/11 and 10 should be 4-6W in the biggest 2 gears. That was a test of a standard double vs. a 1x, but some of the findings apply to this scenario.
However, people who have actually rode SRAM setups say that actually, the gearing works very well for us mortals. I think Ronan (Escape Collective) said similar about the new Campy gearing.
Right now, I am ‘stuck’ with more traditional gearing on my main road bike and my older gravel bike. I guess when I get a new bike, I will go test how SRAM feels on the road before I make a drivetrain decision.
I never said I do this as a training strategy. I just always like the feel of the 39 on flat ground. Yes, I got my first good road bike over 40 years ago when I was 13.
On 11 speed, I used 50/34 and a 12-29 cassette. That was ok and had the 16 cog. I just never loved the smaller chainrings and always being in a 50. Finally, I went 52/36 and 11-32 in the back and totally love those gears except not having the 16 which is only a minor annoyance once in a while.
I think the Sram 48/37 and 10-33 comes as close as possible to 52/36 and 11-32. The new campagnolo system is a bit stranger (48/32).
Honestly, I’m probably going to ditch Campagnolo next. I just bought a Tarmac SL7 and don’t want to cable it with mechanical and I can’t afford a $5000 groupset. Plus Campagnolo power meter solutions are limited and super expensive.
I’m thinking of something like Rival etap shifters and a Quark or Power2Max crankset. Or the AXS $250 power meter upgrade is also an option. Wireless 12 speed for under $2k with a power meter vs $6500 for Campagnolo with a power meter crankset.
I’m not sure whether my post came across right, it wasn’t meant as a dig or criticism. I don’t do what you do, but that’s because my bikes are 1x. Instead, I will often take out my mountain bike with an even smaller chainring in the winter. So basically, I’m doing the same thing as you.
It is just incredible that they decided to Release a Group in 2023 that is limited to a 29 Cassette… The price is just hilarious and the whole group just doesn’t seem to be that great from looks and usability. I’m all for going Wireless for Electronic shifting but 2 Different Batteries just suck, I guess we will have to wait until the SRAM Patent is gone until we get a good Wireless Groupset outside of SRAM.
I’m also not buying that electronic groupsets are that expensive for the manufacturers the Servos and IC boards should not be expensive and the Batteries should also be pretty cheap to buy, but hey if they can sell it…