That's really cool and makes a lot of sense. I doubt Classified has the economy of scale, I'd assume their production run is on the order of magnitude of 1,000 hubs. What order of magnitude would the cost be to refine 1000 of these little hubs? Closer to $1 per hub or $100 per hub? These hubs are selling for well over $1,000 each, I wouldn't think that adding $10 in cost and bumping up the price to $1,020 would be big market loss, but I'm not into that side too much.


5k miles is a lot more than I thought you'd get out of them. Thinking about it more you'd really only incur substantial wear when using the reduced gear, locked out should be effectively zero wear.

This still leaves the question - All of this work to get to 99% efficiency, which makes the hub comparable to a 2x system in the most extreme cross-chained scenarios and 1% worse than a 2x in normal scenarios. I'm open to ideas and riding what's fastest, just having trouble seeing how the numbers point to Classified's system.

And they stilll need to overcome

1) neutral support is not an option with their wheel
2) additional weight
3) need for another shifter
4) proprietary cassettes
5) mechanics have "another" thing to maintain
6) cost

maybe teams care less about 5 and 6.

If SRAM bought them they could build this into their wheels and probably solve several of these problems.

To me it's just another thing that can go wrong in a race and another thing that reduces the flexibility of your bike... No, thank you.

They offer 12 and 13 speed cassettes as well. They don't do a 10 tooth but do have a 12 speed 11-40 so plenty of range. Pretty light as well - quoted weight at least is lighter than Dura Ace. Guess removing front derailleur and inner chainring offsets at least some of the extra hub weight.

Arguably Ineos used it because it was less risk of something going wrong. Shifting to and from really big rings particularly pushing the limits of big-small tooth-differences is a fingers-crossing affair. The entire mechanism being sealed and without any issues with dirty chains or slight issues with FD mounting or trim is attractive. Electronic shifting is something that can go wrong. But it can be done well. I've been on eTap for nearly a decade, 10's of thousands of hours. It's never once failed. And "shifting" an epicyclic seems like it could be fundamentally more reliable than FD shifting with its complex system of pins, ramps, chain wrap, etc, sensitivity to torque, and dependence getting the bulk of a pedal stroke to get the chain wrap necessary to complete a change.

I don't know what you mean about reducing flexibility. You mean it's easier to swap out 2X rings than a rear hub?

The quoted weight of the hub is 492g. The thru axle is 72g and switch 14g, so the thru axle is comparable to a standard thru axle, perhaps marginally heavier. And the switch is minimal.

A SRAM Red front mech & battery is c190g, plus say 100g for a chainring and bolts?

Comparing the Parcours Disc and then the Classified ready one, there’s a 50g saving for the Classified one.

So the weight penalty is around 150g or the equivalent of 3 gels 😂

Checking the cassette weight, an 11-28 is a comparable weight to a SRAM Red 10-28

Being able to go bigger on the cassette could offset the lack of a 10 cog, but would require a bigger front chainring, with a marginal weight penalty.

Less than that as you still need a rear hub and even a pretty fancy one like a DT Swiss 180 is still listed as 193g. So the hub only adds ~300g, and then some/most of that is offset by not needing a FD or inner chainring. Think inner chainrings are more like 30g than 100g though.

Don't think you even need the switch if you're running Shimano as believe it can now integrate with the regular shift buttons/levers.

Actually just updated my post comparing the Parcours disc with and without Classified.

I took the weight of the rings of Rotor’s website but agree there will be differences. Have a few at home so might weigh some for comparison purposes 🤓

As a self-identifying climber, I want to know if they are going to make one that goes the opposite way, i.e. locked in low gears and then when I need the 54x11 for like a minute and ten seconds of my long day, I can get a bigger gear so I am not spun out. Chain line optimized for climbing.

You could do that, it's as simple as flipping the planet carrier ring and outer ring. But it also doesn't make sense. If your roads are up and down at such a steep degree that you need the little ring then you're certainly coasting downhill. If it's shallow enough to pedal downhill then you can probably climb it in the big ring with <1% chain line loss.