Gravel / Gravé / Gnarmac / Groad / ATB

hilly singletrack/off-road

this is also really not the point of that bike, you'd probably quite enjoy an XC bike

i have an xc bike and a gravel bike. i don't like driving much though so i stick to the gravel bike mostly.

tires that big are for crossover between the two for sure. 2.4" is mtb territory! shit i ride 38s on buff singletrack pretty regularly. ride 30 miles of pavement, then do some cool singletrack or gnarly off-road stuff, then back home seems like the ideal to me. like what rodeo labs do.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClhFk2j_PlbE6YmxBRkh2GQ

and yea i know of the spidering. apparently the chainline is a bit wonky and i don't want to get a new crank. i just want shimano to make di2 mtb/road compatible and maybe even the mechanical stuff.

Early adoption woes ;-)

I’m sure Shimano groad groups are just around the corner.

i mean riding non-paved roads ain't exactly new, and the early mtbs were similar to gravel bikes in terms of tire width, geometry (sorta), but i guess the idea of having appropriate equipment for it (and it being more the focus) is newish.

and yea you are probably right: in a few years anyway. the thing that grinds my gears is that they went out of their way to make di2 road/mtb incompatible.

di2 mtb/road compatible

it is if you don't mind 1x.

Tbh i'm of the view that 27.5 wheels don't really have any place on a drop bar bike and a cross bike with 38s is all you need before an XC bike is probably a better idea.

@miro_o has a point though.

Non paved riding isn't new, but cycling is fragmenting faster than companies can crank out stuff to match.

Also why would Shimano want to make their top-of-the-range stuff cross compatible. They're a business. I mean, I can see why, and SRAM does well enough out of it, but I don't see Shimano heading that way to be honest. You can till mix Di2 well enough. As long as you stick to 1X config.

@B0N0R Well, apparently the rest of the cycling world disagrees with you.

Yeah but small ppl ...

because they would sell more? they'd eat into sram's 1x adventure market for sure. lots of people out there want huge range doubles (with near mtb low gears) and big top end too, like 46/11 or 50/11. i can't see any possible business reason to make your shit less versatile when it doesn't cost you anything.

i also don't see it as fragmenting at all, rather the opposite. i'd almost sell my xc bike because i like combining xc/cx type rides with paved riding much more than either on its own.

That's my point. You've prefaced most of your post with 'I'.

We on this forum are generally an exception when you think about it. We're knowledgeable about the market and see how consolidation would work. Lots of people at the end of the day, isn't the complete market.

Road bikes still dominate cycling by a long shot, and the groupsets on that are still road based. OTP bikes still come with mostly road components. Making a one groupset to rule them all would just push everyone to just say 'errr, let's just put this on everything' and bam, why buy anything else?

Think of it the same way as Apple does things.
Do I agree with you on a cross compatibility and how fucking convenient it would be? Hell yes. Does Shimano, I don't think so.

Shimano seem like the type of company that’ll only invest with evidence of a substantial market. And they don’t seem in the habit of releasing anything that isn’t well developed/tested. They’re super conservative on what they recommend (cassette max teeth, shifting on certain rings, servicing of hubs etc).

Maybe they’re waiting for the dust to settle a bit.

2019 might be all about the triple chainset and sequencial shifting ?!?!?

Road bikes still dominate cycling by a long shot

Aren’t far more otp mtbs and hybrids sold?

i don't see how it would hurt, they'd just sell more.

people still would care about having close spacing, and many people wouldn't want a clutch or a long cage, so they'd use road ss rds, and for q-factor, chainline, and ring size reasons you'd still have many different cranks and so on. there would just be some bikes that come oem with sram 1x that would instead have shimano 2x, and they'd have the enthusiasts like ourselves too.

apple is fucking annoying for the same reason of course. but there i think it actually makes sense. the more they lock things up and make them user-friendly the harder they are to fuck up and the better time people have. making road/mtb di2 interoperable would not really cause any problems in that sense.

one sense in which the apple analogy is completely opposite though is that they have good support for a bunch of unix tools (i.e., via homebrew and the clt) which has effectively stolen a bunch of developers that would otherwise probably be linux users. doing that didn't really hurt their main market either. i'm just saying shimano should do the same.

oh yeah 650b make total sense on small bikes. Not the same as 27.5 tho is it ;)

this seems spot on, though i think they are the ones that make the dust settle. i'm still pissed about the flat mount bs.

yea i wanted the xtr gruppo with 40-30-22 x 11-42 di2 with syncro. would be even better with the 9100 11-speed 10-45 cassette.

currently i run 50-34 x 11-40 which works pretty well.

Shimano cares more about fishing line than all of your range woes. Just remember that

I had my Ultegra clutch mech comfortably clearing an 11-40 with a double chainset (16 tooth spread) today. YMMV depending on frame design (this frame drops the mech low enough for a short cage 5800 mech to cover an 11-34, while other frames won't). 40 max sprocket and 45 tooth capacity (officially 34 max and 39 capacity). Tried a 42 but the cage didn't clear it. If you stick to official Shimano spec they don't offer a group suitable for off-road drop bar, but the r8000/rx800 stuff does a lot more than it says on the box. Still a bit of a gamble depending on your frame. I'd expect an 11-36 to work on any bike, 11-40 on some. That with a sub compact chainset you've got a fair amount to play with.

That's why I echoed @miro_o initial statement. Until the dynamic changes towards a more versatile bikes, I don't see Shimano pushing anywhere fast. Why rock the boat? Also Shimano is synonymous with a certain reliability that commands a premium.

The argument for electronic used to be pointless. Still is for the majority of users, but now look, everyone wants it. Shimano have always used the trickle down method of development, so I can see them just biding their time, and releasing a fit and forget product.

As for people fucking things up? I fix bikes for a living,so I'm afraid I beg to differ. Square leg, round hole mentality is rife!
You're giving humans far too much credit, so whilst I agree with you in principle, practically, I don't see Shimano changing that whatsoever. Why offer support, when you can just create a product that doesn't make you do so.

@miro_o That's a personal observation from working in a few bike shops. Where I am now, It's road road road. En Masse yearly change for new road bikes.

a bit over capacity is fine. i ran a 46-36 x 11-40 with a 5800 gs rd with a wolftooth road link. tension wasn't great though and shifting onto the 11t a bit sloppy. the tanpan i have paired with an xtr sgs works better.

and @Chak, i'm giving people too much credit? i'm going to quote you on that because normally i'm accused of being a horrible pessimist! so thanks! my bidon is half full i guess. or something like that.

When 30(front)/34(rear) isn't enough for you, maybe you should switch hobbies. Fishing perhaps?

BTW Shimano still has triples.. meaning you can have something like 26/34.

the market demands more genesis Croix de fers and not any of this

Then you'e primed for dissing people's mums and telling them to 'say it to your face'!

Empty that bidon, shun the norm, start using a scooter! THE REBELLION BEGINS NOW!

bitch please. you must not have any steep hills around you, or you don't weigh anything and are super strong/never get tired. there is a paved climb i like near me that is a mile at 14% avg (so the kom is ~5.4mph avg), and lots of gravel roads and singletrack that is nearly that steep avg (and much steeper in certain places) and much longer.

and in any case i was criticizing what shimano makes available. until recently the lowest you could get was 34/32 and now you can get 34/34. i've never run a 46/30 crank but probably would if i could get one as a part of a group.

i rode with the guy who got 3rd at us road nationals over the weekend on one such course and even he was running a mtb crankset.

i don't mind grinding a bit but you just can't do it when it is loose or on super steep wet pavement (this is seattle i'm talking about)

Shifting was crisp, or as crisp as it would be on any cassette with the b-tension wound in at least (no worse than the 11-34 Shimano intended the mech for). No roadlink or other hacks, just works out of the box. Tension is fine especially with the clutch. I've found the tanpan/XTR combo works well but make the shift quite heavy at the lever, and eats cables a fair bit quicker than a normal set up. The RX is surprisingly light on the lever for a clutch mech which is a refreshing change.

yea it does at the default clutch tension setting but it is quite nice with that turned down a bit. i suspect that is really all the rx rd is. i haven't experienced the cable eating. mine has been on the same set of cables for like 3000 miles or so? i might end up getting the di2 rx mech at some point though. what size cassette is this with?

Personally using an 11-36 (with sub compact chainset this is plenty for what I tend to ride). I pulled a wheel from a regular customers bike to try out up to 42t and it ran cleanly up to 40 on both rings which was surprising. He's one of a few we have set up with MTB mechs (XTR in his case) and tanpans. The tight cable routing and extra tension seems to make the familiar shimano gear-cable-snapped-in-shifter issue a bit more regular (especially combined with those stupid plastic coated cables).