Sorry, you lost me at GCN...

Interesting.

I think you have 2 separate systems, one for the hub one for the rear mech (in fact that fits with them saying you can still run a mechanical cable operated rear mech).

The Qs I'd have...
- I'd like to see the independent tests that the rear hub is really 99.x% efficient. Planetary gears are usually not so. One reason we all don't ride gearbox bikes or Sturmey Archer hubs on road bikes.
(Still maybe not a killer for a non-racing road bike is a few % inneficient).

- a unique cassette.
That always just bothers me about obsolete parts / unavailability, esp. From a smaller Co that could go bust (ffs it's hard enough to get regular kit at present). £2k down the pan is your cassette isn't available when worn out.

Looks surprisingly awesome. Maybe I missed it but do you HAVE to use their wheels? That seems like the biggest hurdle if so

Sounded like it (would help maybe if they sold it as a hub-only option to build into your own choice of rims).

^^^^^This.
99%+ for a planetary gear system sounds questionable. From an efficiency standpoint, gearboxes are a very mature tech.
There is a reason performance bikes don't use gearboxes. Lots of attempts over the years....


Here's a Colnago/Ferrari one from 1986.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

definitely interesting (assuming claims are true) but needs to be better integrated and standardised before i'd buy it:
- shift via standard di2/axs/etap shifters
- hubs able to be built into other rims
- service and support

as compared to ceramic speed's driven system (now nearly 3 years after it was first shown) it probably has an easier path since it is a less radical concept and somewhat integrates into existing systems but we'll see...

To be fair, this only applies in the small ring. Depending on how much time you spend in that gear, it may not matter much.

I really like this concept. Would be nice to have an HG hub, but that's ok. If this company is still around in 5+ years, I'll consider it.

I like the concept a lot. Not necessarily digging the proprietary cassette options, though. The first 7 cogs are the same in all 4 offerings. Wish the 11-27 would cover the 21-27 range with 3 cogs instead of 4 so they could have a 16t cog between the 15 and 17.

---

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

I think the basic idea will still be around in 5 years but the nuts and bolts will have changed significantly and it will no longer be an independent company. As it stands, assuming all the rumors about the next generation DA are true, they have already shot themselves in the foot by integrating with current Di2. On a MTB a standalone shifter would be acceptable but it needs to integrate with a brifter on the road meaning you have to hack into the Shimano or SRAM ecosystem. SRAM is the logical partner as SRAM already has a profound hatred for front front derailleurs. SRAMs dinner plate cassettes are also very heavy and very expensive leaving plenty of room to offset the weight and cost penalty of the system.

I think the real advantage comes to the choice of font rings. With 3 options 60, 54 and 50 you cover the entire range from full TT to extreme gravel. But again this is something they need to partner with someone to really make happen. There aren't a whole lot of single rings options in the sizes I listed which greatly limits the usability of the system. If you use a 40 tooth front ring you are getting a 40 x 28 combo and they have done the hub spacing around a 142mm design so it won't fit on modern MTBs with boost or super boost spacing. That to me is a conundrum in itself about why they chose the 142mm spacing for a product that as it stands would make much more sense on an MTB.

yes, in order for this to take off they need to either partner with sram/shimano or licence the tech to them
if they can get the big guns interested then i can see this becoming an awesome new way forward for bikes. otherwise it will remain a neat innovation that never really delivers on what it could be.
the question then becomes what is in it for those companies to become beholden to someone else?

I would buy this tomorrow if they sold the hub separately. If I were them I would work on a rim brake version, a MTB version, cassette compatibility and better integration with etap and shimano without partnering with them. Via "mechanical" integration, like via microswitches or satélites that integrate with the shifters better. And only consider selling to the big names when more established.

For durability reasons, they don't recommend a chainring smaller than 40T. With the .68 reduction and the largest offered cassette cog (34T), that's a drive ratio of ~0.8:1. That's not going to cut it in the MTB world where the consensus on gearing has pretty much settled on 32T or 30T chain rings with a 50T or 52T biggest cassette cog, or drive ratios in the +/- 0.6:1 range.

---

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

50*.7/34 isn't even 1:1, and mountainous gravel roads can get almost as demanding for low ratios as mountain biking.

Pretty funny how everybody bitches and moans about minutiae and specialty scenarios, which the concept (other than many predecessors) can easily technically accommodate.

And with the potential of many different specs and configurations that can be manufactured/fitted without major retooling, once the technology is established in the biggest market segments.
We are talking Europe, after all.
Pretty sure they gave this plenty of thought.

The garuantee👍

If you add a mechanical triple on the front you could have 66 gears for touring without replacing worn gears too. Once the gears are worn you can't throw on a new pair of rings, you have to decide if you'll put a new hub in the old wheel or build a new wheel right?

Will they sell matching front wheels, aero wheels or (more likely) offer hub only?

One thing, if this mounts on the rear disc brake braze ons....where is the brake?

I Think this looks interesting, not in a way to get rid of the FD, But close range cassette and effectively have a triple in front to get a wider range

Me too. I scrolled the whole thread hoping to find a link to something else with info. Not finding anything, I watched the GCN video, and gosh darnit, found it informative, watchable, and reasonably concise. Thanks to the OP for posting. It had come up on my youtube feed, but I didn't watch till this thread.

Ridley Kanzo Fast gravel bike is currently available with the system combined with GRX di2. For over 1000 euro more than standard GRX di2. Most expensive option for the bike.

I really like the idea. But I'm a cheapskate, happily riding gravel on a ten year old aluminum Giant TCX 1 (39) x 10 (11x28 or 32) Shimano Ultegra.

Can't believe that Dan hasn't done a review of this product yet.

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

Realistically, I only use the small chainring for climbing something really steep. With that in mind the only time I would use the lower range of the hub with the planetary would be climbing (as I understand it) so it's really a small amount of time using the gearbox unless I'm in the mountains.