Sram Electronic group se

wellbeloved747

http://road.cc/content/news/118627-video-sram’s-electronic-groupset-spotted-tour-california

saw this and i was thinking about it quite a bit, i mean they are so behind Shimano and Campag but yet again they bough out Hydraulic road brake first? and the idea of this being a wireless set sounds unbelievable, what do you guys think?

papavero

Wireless control maybe but you still need power unless you are going to put a battery in each mech and the shifters.

Rodrego Hernandez

'so far behind' - really?

wireless? So what?

It's simply another electronic groupset from a far from reliable manufacturer.

StillGoing

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

'so far behind' - really?

wireless? So what?

It's simply another electronic groupset from a far from reliable manufacturer.

Absolute rubbish. We all know of stories of system failure from the various groupset manufacturers, but it doesn't make them far from reliable. I've had SRAM the last 4 years without any issue yet the Shimano groupsets I had before all gave problems and the Campag on a riding buddies bike is prone to falling to pieces. Personal opinions and experiences are one thing but to label a manufacturer unreliable? If that were the case SRAM would be out of business instead of going from strength to strength. You don't like SRAM which is fine, but some of us don't like Shimano, Campagnolo etc.

andrewjoseph

papavero wrote:

Wireless control maybe but you still need power unless you are going to put a battery in each mech and the shifters.

This is what the patents seem to suggest. 4 batteries, 2 x mechs, 2 x shifters. The senders and receivers go to sleep until the rider operates the shifters extending battery life 4 x over normal continuous operating systems.

thegreatdivide

SRAM don't look to be in a good place these days. Late to the 11-speed game, late to the electronic game, had to recal their brakes because they were guff. And they're now the minority in the Pro Peloton.

Rodrego Hernandez

philthy3 wrote:

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

'so far behind' - really?

wireless? So what?

It's simply another electronic groupset from a far from reliable manufacturer.

Absolute rubbish. We all know of stories of system failure from the various groupset manufacturers, but it doesn't make them far from reliable. I've had SRAM the last 4 years without any issue yet the Shimano groupsets I had before all gave problems and the Campag on a riding buddies bike is prone to falling to pieces. Personal opinions and experiences are one thing but to label a manufacturer unreliable? If that were the case SRAM would be out of business instead of going from strength to strength. You don't like SRAM which is fine, but some of us don't like Shimano, Campagnolo etc.

When Shimano and Campagnolo have recalled as many products as SRAM have, come back to me.

BrandonA

wellbeloved747 wrote:

http://road.cc/content/news/118627-video-sram’s-electronic-groupset-spotted-tour-california

saw this and i was thinking about it quite a bit, i mean they are so behind Shimano and Campag but yet again they bough out Hydraulic road brake first? and the idea of this being a wireless set sounds unbelievable, what do you guys think?

I think the idea of having wireless shifting is far from unbelievable. Its the next obvious step now they work digitally rather than manually.

I don't think you'll get wireless breaking as even if there is only a 0.00000001% of failure the last thing you'd want is a failure where you're speeding down a hill. Wireless shifting though should not cause an issue as long as the signal is encoded thus preventing others from affecting your gear changes.

The size, weight and lifespan of the batteries though will be very important.

I wouldn't want to buy SRAM though but I was thinking about upgrading my DA9000 to DA9070 next year. Will be interesting to know if they are working on a wireless version and if so when it is likely to be released.

The only negative I'd have is that my frame has internal cabling for 3 cables. If wireless is the new norm a bike will only need to route one cable. I'd therefore have to cover 2 sets of the holes. This could though be a good excuse in a few years for a new frame.

markhewitt1978

papavero wrote:

Wireless control maybe but you still need power unless you are going to put a battery in each mech and the shifters.

You would only need a beefy battery (i.e. like the current Di2) for the mechs. For the shifters a coin cell battery would suffice as all they are doing is transmitting a signal - think of the likes of speed / cadence sensors, they can run for a year on a single coin cell battery.

wellbeloved747

papavero wrote:

Wireless control maybe but you still need power unless you are going to put a battery in each mech and the shifters.

Apparently thats the idea according to the video?

papavero

wellbeloved747 wrote:

papavero wrote:

Wireless control maybe but you still need power unless you are going to put a battery in each mech and the shifters.

Apparently thats the idea according to the video?

Well thats speculation by some journalists, those mechs don't look big enough to include a battery. Compare them with the size of eps/di2 mechs and battery. Button cells in the shifters would work and give decent life but you need a bit more power to move stuff. For racing you could shrink the battery and change it every day but I still can't see it fitting in the mechs pictured.

DiscoBoy

I don't think I'd like the way they are proposing that the buttons will work.

mfin

DiscoBoy wrote:

I don't think I'd like the way they are proposing that the buttons will work.

Have you emailed them to stop production? Quickly, do it.

BTW, how are they proposing the buttons will work?

DiscoBoy

mfin wrote:

DiscoBoy wrote:

I don't think I'd like the way they are proposing that the buttons will work.

Have you emailed them to stop production? Quickly, do it.

BTW, how are they proposing the buttons will work?

I'm sorry, I thought that this was a discussion forum, so I was discussing the topic.

Go and read about them for yourself if you want to know.

spinndrift

papavero wrote:

wellbeloved747 wrote:

papavero wrote:

Wireless control maybe but you still need power unless you are going to put a battery in each mech and the shifters.

Apparently thats the idea according to the video?

Well thats speculation by some journalists, those mechs don't look big enough to include a battery. Compare them with the size of eps/di2 mechs and battery. Button cells in the shifters would work and give decent life but you need a bit more power to move stuff. For racing you could shrink the battery and change it every day but I still can't see it fitting in the mechs pictured.

That's a fair point put it you look at the size of the two 'clip on' batteries they aren't far off the old Di2 power pack in size.

Bar Shaker

My guess would be that they will use rechargeable internal batteries in each component and perhaps have a battery status on a controller. Mech motors need amps, so they will do well to match the power from Shimano's big batteries with individual units at each motor.

Other than an easier installation, wireless seems like a gimmick.

markhewitt1978

If they could get the batteries to recharge by taking some of the energy out of your motion while you're using the brakes, then that would be super cool.

cougie

And super heavy - at least to begin with ?

Iamnot Wiggins

OP, why don't you buy an Apex groupset, stick a "electronic" sticker on it and pass it off as this new groupset? It would match your genuine "s-works" a treat!

papavero

Having read the bikeradar assessment they make a good case for it being a disguised wireless system. If so, looks like a AA sized cell in each mech. If they use 3.6v lithium you can get 2.4Ah from a non rechargeable and less from rechargeable. Would be easy to put a couple of spares in your pocket. Anyone know the voltage and capacity of di2 or eps batteries?

DiscoBoy

Confirmed wireless:

http://youtu.be/9Yn_U7vcB4g

Very interesting if you don't have a frame set up for current electronic solutions....

sloppyschleckonds

SRAM have always gone their own way, should be interesting.

southdownswolf

So wireless confirmed and as it is in a UCI race, then it must be on the market within 9 months. So definitely a 2015 groupset.

I reckon that for 2016 or 17 groupset there will be a new Quarq powermeter which links in via bluetooth/ant+ to provide automatic gear changes depending on a user calibrated power output. Brian Cookson did say that he is looking for technology to move on....

stueys

Given the fact that everything I've owned that uses a wireless signal has at some point suffered inconsistent signals, etc, I'm genuinely struggling to see the rationale or benefit of going wireless. Majority of modern frames have internally routed cabling so cables are neat and out of sight/wind, wireless needs multiple batteries so not seeing a weight advantage.

Seems like a solution desperately looking for a problem

Old_Timer

SRAM has been totally reliable in its mechanical groupsets for me, Running a total Rival group for over 2 years now. Only recall of major consequence I know about for SRAM is the hydraulic brake problem with the seals in cold temps. They were on top of the recall from the beginning and took their lumps without any excuses. Shimano has endured recalls the same way, issue the recall, take care of the customers and fix the problem. Campagnolo has gone through a few recalls, also, and they came out of them with better products.

Engineering is a tight wire act when there is pressure to get a system out to the public as quickly as possible. You have to be able to take the knackered designs with the accolades for the great products and move on. I thing SRAM took their time with electronic systems, they had all of the hydraulic brake engineering and production going on at the same time and probably had to prioritize. With the ghost shifting problems Mavic had with Mekktronic(SP) I an leery about wireless right now. The encoding and receiver/transmitter issues for frequencies is a tough nut to crack.

DiscoBoy

Old_Timer wrote:

SRAM has been totally reliable in its mechanical groupsets for me, Running a total Rival group for over 2 years now. Only recall of major consequence I know about for SRAM is the hydraulic brake problem with the seals in cold temps.

There is a known, common failure point in the form of double tap levers often breaking, though.

sloppyschleckonds

DiscoBoy wrote:

Old_Timer wrote:

SRAM has been totally reliable in its mechanical groupsets for me, Running a total Rival group for over 2 years now. Only recall of major consequence I know about for SRAM is the hydraulic brake problem with the seals in cold temps.

There is a known, common failure point in the form of double tap levers often breaking, though.

Stop talking absolute drivel.

DiscoBoy

SloppySchleckonds wrote:

DiscoBoy wrote:

Old_Timer wrote:

SRAM has been totally reliable in its mechanical groupsets for me, Running a total Rival group for over 2 years now. Only recall of major consequence I know about for SRAM is the hydraulic brake problem with the seals in cold temps.

There is a known, common failure point in the form of double tap levers often breaking, though.

Stop talking absolute drivel.

Compared to how often shimano levers snap, I would describe it as often.

dennisn

Stueys wrote:

Given the fact that everything I've owned that uses a wireless signal has at some point suffered inconsistent signals, etc, I'm genuinely struggling to see the rationale or benefit of going wireless.
Seems like a solution desperately looking for a problem

Gotta agree here with "inconsistent signals".
As to the rationale or benefits. It may not really have any but cyclist's around the world will buy it simply for showoff / bling value and that's enough reason for Sram to produce it.
And yes, it does seem somewhat of a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Old_Timer

I am not aware of a problem with levers on the SRAM double tap breaking, mine and the others around our area with SRAM levers haven't had a problem with this. I'll keep an eye on mine and watch for any posts here or other places about the levers and breakage. No manufacturer is immune to problems in their processes or designs, they have to handle each in a wise manner or pay the price in sales and their reputation. I was impressed in the manner that SRAM handled the problems with the hydraulic systems recall and at the major CX event here on the states, they flew in a large group of mechanics and technicians that replaced every SRAM hydraulic brake system on competitor's bicycles with mechanical systems that were checked out, no questions asked. Seems to be the correct way of approaching the problem. I'm not a SRAM shill, I am looking at a switch to Ultegra for my CAAD 10, not because of issues with SRAM but because I want to try the Shimano system at that level now.

Bill

StillGoing

DiscoBoy wrote:

SloppySchleckonds wrote:

DiscoBoy wrote:

Old_Timer wrote:

SRAM has been totally reliable in its mechanical groupsets for me, Running a total Rival group for over 2 years now. Only recall of major consequence I know about for SRAM is the hydraulic brake problem with the seals in cold temps.

There is a known, common failure point in the form of double tap levers often breaking, though.

Stop talking absolute drivel.

Compared to how often shimano levers snap, I would describe it as often.

Proof? How often have you had a SRAM lever snap then? I've had SRAM Force and Red on 2 bikes for over 4 years without a problem of any kind as has my main riding buddy. An acquaintance has SRAM Rival on his and has also never had a problem. Others I know with Shimano have had no problems yet the one person I know who has Campagnolo has had a multitude of problems with just about every component of the same groupset. Does this mean Campag are crap? No it doesn't. It means he's been unlucky or is misusing the equipment.