Forum home Mountain biking forum MTB general

SRAM

ilovedirtilovedirt Posts: 5,798
edited August 2014 in MTB general
I don't understand SRAM's product branding. Surely SRAM is drivetrain, truvativ is cranks and stuff, avid is brakes, rockshox is suspension? But now SRAM also have a couple of brakesets, cranksets etc. which are similar to their avid/truvativ counterparts? Why?
Production Privee Shan

B'Twin Triban 5

Posts

  • Chunkers1980Chunkers1980 Posts: 8,035
    Weird innit.

    Probably some internal wrangling going on between the parent company being SRAM and the bought in brands to complete their product portfolio.

    Avid used to be the best back in the day of cantis, now it seems to have gone to shite, so perhaps they are trying to fool the uninformed?
  • lawmanlawman Posts: 6,868
    Avid used to be the best back in the day of cantis, now it seems to have gone to shite, so perhaps they are trying to fool the uninformed?

    And SRAM's entry into the world of road hydraulic brakes went really well didn't it!! Avid and Truvativ have had a bit of a bad rep in recent years, the brakes weren't great and the cranks were never as good as shimano so I guess they've tried to re-brand them to extent, because RS forks had a decent rep they've remained untouched.

  • CitizenLeeCitizenLee Posts: 2,227
    Proof will be in their new Guide brakes.
    Current:
    NukeProof Mega FR 2012
    Cube NuRoad 2018
    Previous:
    2015 Genesis CdF 10, 2014 Cube Hyde Race, 2012 NS Traffic, 2007 Specialized SX Trail, 2005 Specialized Demo 8
  • duskdusk Posts: 583
    lawman wrote:
    Avid used to be the best back in the day of cantis, now it seems to have gone to shite, so perhaps they are trying to fool the uninformed?

    And SRAM's entry into the world of road hydraulic brakes went really well didn't it!! Avid and Truvativ have had a bit of a bad rep in recent years, the brakes weren't great and the cranks were never as good as shimano so I guess they've tried to re-brand them to extent, because RS forks had a decent rep they've remained untouched.
    this, if you had two pairs of identical cranks branded Sram and Truvativ which one would you have.....
    YT Wicked 160 ltd
    Cotic BFe
    DMR Trailstar
    Canyon Roadlite
  • dusk wrote:
    lawman wrote:
    Avid used to be the best back in the day of cantis, now it seems to have gone to shite, so perhaps they are trying to fool the uninformed?

    And SRAM's entry into the world of road hydraulic brakes went really well didn't it!! Avid and Truvativ have had a bit of a bad rep in recent years, the brakes weren't great and the cranks were never as good as shimano so I guess they've tried to re-brand them to extent, because RS forks had a decent rep they've remained untouched.
    this, if you had two pairs of identical cranks branded Sram and Truvativ which one would you have.....

    Shimano.
  • ilovedirtilovedirt Posts: 5,798
    To be fair, my descendants have done alright thus far. The retention system still isn't as good though. Problem is, all truvativ products look naff. Sticking a SRAM logo on them doesn't change that.
    Production Privee Shan

    B'Twin Triban 5
  • The RookieThe Rookie Posts: 27,748
    You can't run a smaller than 32t wheel on a 104 (OK 30T with threaded chainwheel), much bigger on a 120, so I doubt it (apart from possible double specific).
  • welshkevwelshkev Posts: 9,690
    dusk wrote:
    lawman wrote:
    Avid used to be the best back in the day of cantis, now it seems to have gone to shite, so perhaps they are trying to fool the uninformed?

    And SRAM's entry into the world of road hydraulic brakes went really well didn't it!! Avid and Truvativ have had a bit of a bad rep in recent years, the brakes weren't great and the cranks were never as good as shimano so I guess they've tried to re-brand them to extent, because RS forks had a decent rep they've remained untouched.
    this, if you had two pairs of identical cranks branded Sram and Truvativ which one would you have.....

    Shimano.

    beat me to it...definitely this ^^^^ :lol:
  • CitizenLeeCitizenLee Posts: 2,227
    Race Face, Wolftooth, Blackspire, NSB etc all make a 30t 104 BCD ring.

    It's the 28t that won't fit, needs 96 BCD.
    Current:
    NukeProof Mega FR 2012
    Cube NuRoad 2018
    Previous:
    2015 Genesis CdF 10, 2014 Cube Hyde Race, 2012 NS Traffic, 2007 Specialized SX Trail, 2005 Specialized Demo 8
  • The RookieThe Rookie Posts: 27,748
    And as far as I am aware alloy those are threaded and don't take a full female chainring bolt through them.
  • CitizenLeeCitizenLee Posts: 2,227
    The Rookie wrote:
    And as far as I am aware alloy those are threaded and don't take a full female chainring bolt through them.

    You just need longer bolts, which I'm sure most of us have in our toolbox anyway. The important fact is they work with 104BCD cranks.
    Current:
    NukeProof Mega FR 2012
    Cube NuRoad 2018
    Previous:
    2015 Genesis CdF 10, 2014 Cube Hyde Race, 2012 NS Traffic, 2007 Specialized SX Trail, 2005 Specialized Demo 8
  • The RookieThe Rookie Posts: 27,748
    The Rookie wrote:
    You can't run a smaller than 32t wheel on a 104 (OK 30T with threaded chainwheel), much bigger on a 120, so I doubt it (apart from possible double specific).
    Really, never knew....oh yes sorry I did know that!
  • CitizenLeeCitizenLee Posts: 2,227
    Yeah you sounded confused so I was just clarifying it is possible :)
    Current:
    NukeProof Mega FR 2012
    Cube NuRoad 2018
    Previous:
    2015 Genesis CdF 10, 2014 Cube Hyde Race, 2012 NS Traffic, 2007 Specialized SX Trail, 2005 Specialized Demo 8
  • duskdusk Posts: 583
    I don't get why Sram make cranks which can take a direct mount chainring and then come up with a proprietary bcd to fit smaller chainrings???
    YT Wicked 160 ltd
    Cotic BFe
    DMR Trailstar
    Canyon Roadlite
  • dusk wrote:
    I don't get why Sram make cranks which can take a direct mount chainring and then come up with a proprietary bcd to fit smaller chainrings???

    So you can remove the chainring without removing the crank.
  • njee20njee20 Posts: 9,613
    You thinking XX1? If so yes, it's so you can swap chainrings without removing the cranks.
Sign In or Register to comment.