scott8888 wrote:
And one of the delightful side-effects of SRAMs push for smaller front rings and rear cassettes is that you wear out the components quicker. If the cassettes cost anything like the Eagle cassettes this isn't so trivial.
i agree with your premise. but i don't agree with the outcome. i think a lot depends on how much more time you spend in the big ring. that could negate the argument. do you really change your rings a bunch on your MTB? or your 1x?
beyond that, i think the 5 to10 percent difference is how many more times your chain hits a tooth is way more than offset by the quality of the component. of all the things to worry about - and since i first rode this group last month i've tried to think of the things to worry about - this has fallen to the least of my concerns.
if you read what other tech editors around the industry are saying about this group, i think you'll find it's gotten a very good reception. this is by far, far and away, the best shifting system SRAM has made. certainly this is in part a result of mandating the 13-tooth differential between the rings; and no more long RD cages.
to me, the one thing SRAM hasn't yet done is sufficiently reduce the gearing for gravel. you'll either need to move to a smaller set of rings, or a larger cassette range. but each comes with an issue: move to a 40/33 and the frame companies need to come up with a new FD tab system. move to, say, a 10-36, and you need to start putting longer cages on your RDs again.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman