Hmmmm…but sticking with 2x (which I think is wise for the road).
4 Likes
Looks noisy. The lower jockey wheel is bent 
Unless you stick a 10-52 pie plate on the wheel and pair it to a 48 or 50 crank.
I wonder at what point will the groupset manufacturers stop chasing another cog on the back?
IMO there is a point where unless the plan is a 1x, some of the tradeoffs of more cogs on your cassette simply isn’t worth it
8 Likes
I would like a 56/39 front ring with 12x42 in the back.
3 Likes
I totally agree. It’s really hard to beat the 12s 11-30 and 11-34 options right now, and it’s hard to imagine needing anything more.
It does seem like the trend of a wider range cassette is continuing to grow, even in the pro peloton though, and the 12s 11-30 is basically the 11s 11-28 with an extra 30t added on, which seemed like a big win at the time. If the 13s 11-34 is just a 12s 11-30 with an extra 34t, it would sort of eliminate the need for the 11-30. 
I see no issue with simply having both cassettes (and I do), but maybe the goal is to only need one for 2x setups which clearly aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.
I’m really glad that Shimano has redesigned some of their cassettes though. I hated the 11s 11-34 but the 12s ones are great. 
1 Like
Battery in the derailleur, not a wired connection to an external battery. Finally.
2 Likes
So how long until this makes it to Ultegra so I can afford it 
5 Likes
2027
1 Like
As they note, SRAM has a patent on removable/interchangeable batteries (seems like a dumb thing to be able to patent, but here we are). So presumably this would have to have charge-in-situ type batteries and/or different batteries for FD and RD, even if wireless. A win for SRAM there, as having the same batteries for everything and being able to easily find a spare is pretty nice.
Re: 13s, I really only seem the (marginal) utility for 1x, and Shimano is historically not a big proponent of that setup. 13s would mean YET ANOTHER non-backward-compatible cassette, chain, derailleurs etc. I really appreciate (for example) the interoperability of SRAM’s wireless offerings, with everything from Red to T-type MTB using the same wireless shifting, batteries, chain etc.
2 Likes
same. im working on taking my ultegra di2 soloist back to cables. Will use sram hrd and the 12sp ratio sh kit for a bit, and may switch to cable disc brakes later. I got a deal on some Growtac equal brakes which appear to be the BEST mechanical disc brakes on the market even tho they are single caliper actuated.
Maybe I’ll regret the decision and go back to hydro and electronic, maybe not. I have plans for these components in the future anyway for a rando steel frame bike
An 11-30 plus a 34T cog (11-34 plus a 16T cog) would be close to perfect. I find I use the 16t a lot in training, but I also hate giving up the extra range on the big end.
3 Likes
The issue with cables for a 12 speed road cog or higher is that the spacing in between cogs is so narrow and sensitive that it’s hard to create a system that can make a shift that small super precisely. I remember reading somewhere that Shimano engineers said the 105 12-speed mechanical was maybe the most difficult group sets they had designed
2 Likes
I was thinking the same. And no idea if Shimano had similar issues on the GRX side, but their new 12s there is cable as well with 1x & 2x options. And of course the Campy Ekar 1x13 is mechanical too. I get that there may be more potential setup and use issues here vs electronic, but it’s not impossible given the options already in use.
1 Like
As long as they can keep adding cogs within the current design parameters, they will do it. You may see options re: the freehub design (XDR, N3W, etc) but the limitations of the frame / hub dimensions will be the defining factor.
Unless they can offer true innovation that creates a paradigm shift within the marketplace…but that has been the issue for a number of years now. Without something innovative to offer, component suppliers rely on the tired strategy of “add another gear”.
Campag is really the poster child for this, IMO…they are usually the first ones to add a cog because the innovations have all happened in front of them and they need to create market buzz.
1 Like
For average folks, Shimano should create cassettes where the smallest cog is a 12. Average / recreational cyclists don’t really need an 50x11 or larger gear unless they are going down hill (50x12 @ 90 rpm is just under 30mph), but folks would benefit from having an additional larger cog / smaller gear
6 Likes
But 50x12 is the same as 46x11 with the benefit of a lighter and cheaper cassette (and RD if it causes them to make it bigger for the larger easier gear). I feel like 11T is a good compromise on smallest cog.
Gravel bikes really are what the average person (not average competitive user) should be using regarding gearing, geometry, and tire sizes.
1 Like
Gravel bikes really are what the average person (not average competitive user) should be using regarding gearing, geometry, and tire sizes.
Basically sub-compact road gearing. I would strongly prefer if they offered it with road chainline.
4 Likes
Internal cable routing is also contributing to the death of cable shifting. The tight bends needed to route through the bar/stem/headset add a ton of friction and wear, which combined with tight tolerances for 12/13 speed systems make it really hard to get consistently precise shifting. Not to mention the added headache of running shift cables as well as a brake hose.
I’m no fan of internal routing, but that’s definitely where new road and gravel bikes are headed, so component makers are catering to it. I’d bet GRX 12s is the last high end cable actuated group.
4 Likes