Gear News
You are looking at: Home : Gear News

SRAM XX revealed

SRAM unveils ultralight 2x10 groupset to the world - how did BM's predictions stack up?


Posted: 4 June 2009
by Mike Davis

sram10_xx_crank_l (23K)
sram10_xx_cass_l (13K) sram10_xx_rmech_l (12K) sram10_xx_brake_l (5K) sram10_xx_lever_l (5K) sram10_xx_fmech_l (3K) sram10_xx_pressfit_l (3K)

Full details of SRAM's all-new XX group are now out in the wild. We had a stab in the dark about likely features back in November 2008, so how awesome were the powers of the Bikemagic Hat Of Wild Speculation?

We said: ...the single-lever DoubleTap shifting technology (one click to upshift, two clicks to downshift) could perhaps make an appearance - SRAM already makes DoubleTap shifters for flat-bar road bikes.

They said: EPIC FAIL to kick off with, with the XX shifters using the same double thumb lever design as SRAM's existing MTB shifters but in a very compact, lightweight package complete with carbon fibre pull lever and top cover. The XX shifters share X.0's lever position adjustment, and there's a new MatchMaker X bar clamp if you want to combine all your controls. The key thing about the XX shifters, though, is that the right-hand one has ten clicks in it, which brings us neatly to...

We said: ... we wouldn't bet against a 2x10 transmission setup. Many XC racers are already using double-chainring setups, after all. A Red-style one-piece cassette looks likely.

They said: DOUBLE WIN. As the name (rather blatantly) suggests, XX is a twenty-speed setup - double chainring, ten-speed cassette. The cassette's quite a piece of work, with the middle eight sprockets (a pedant notes: SRAM, they're not "cogs"...) being CNC machined out of a single big block of steel. In a weight-saving measure, the biggest sprocket is aluminium. On the face of it that sounds like a recipe for rapid wear, but given that the XX cassette will come in either 11-32 or 11-36, it should be no worse than a middle chainring and it's replaceable without having to spring for a whole new cassette. Which is good - apparently it takes nine hours to machine the thing, so it's not going to be cheap.

While the X-Dome one-piece construction is borrowed from SRAM's Red road group, the XX cassette is a considerably more elaborate bit of work. Cyclocross racers who tried Red in the dirt reported all sorts of clogging problems, so SRAM's gone for an actually quite spectacular open design for XX, with lots of holes for mud to pass through and get away from the teeth. More holes = more CNC time, though. The result is impressively light, with an 11-32 coming in at a claimed 185g and the wide-range 11-36 at 208g.

Up front is the Truvativ double-ring crankset, the first MTB crank specifically designed for a 2x10 transmission. The arms themselves are composite carbon fibre (the arms) and aluminium (the spider) construction, with a proprietary 120/80mm BCD. Available chainring combinations are 26/39 (probably of most use to 29er riders), 28/42 and 30/45. Mathematically-inclined readers will notice that all those combinations are proportionally equal - the big rings all have 1.5 times as many teeth as the small ones. This is, as you might guess, not a coincidence. For a clean front shift, you need points around the chainrings where the chain can have one roller sat on a tooth on each ring. By choosing those particular combinations, SRAM has ensured more of those alignments. Helping things along are four sets of ramps/pins on the outer ring.

While chainline is a par-for-the-course 49.5mm, because there are only two rings the whole thing is narrower - 156mm between the outer faces of the cranks (where the pedal eyes are). The theory is that having your feet closer together is more biomechanically efficient, which seems intuitively appealing although as far as we know there's no actual evidence for it. It'll be slightly moot for owners of bikes with wide chainstays, though, as the ultra-narrow XX cranks may not fit. To accommodate that, there'll be alternative cranks with an extra 10mm of width. That's not done just by whacking in a longer BB axle - chainline is the same, the crankarms sweep out more.

As well as stance width options, you'll be presented with an array of BB choices. Or rather, most people won't - the vast majority of frames currently available have standard threaded bottom brackets into which only the GXP outboard bearing setup will fit. If you happen to have a frame designed around the BB30 push-in oversized bearing standard, there's an XX crank to fit that - it'll save you 60g.

There's also a third option - SRAM's new PressFit 30. This takes BB30-sized bearings and houses them in resin cups. You'll need a frame with a 46mm internal diameter BB shell to use them. PressFit is intended to do away with the snap rings and close tolerances that regular BB30 requires, but does the world need yet another BB standard?

We said: It's notable that nearly all of SRAM's brands are mentioned in the teaser announcement, including RockShox. We're going to stick our neck out and say that there's a strong possibility of some serious integration in the pursuit of ultimate light weight - stuff like a fork with an integrated brake caliper, shifters with built-in lockout levers, that kind of thing.

They said: FAIL for the integrated brake caliper thing, which to be fair was a pretty left-field suggestion. We giving ourselves a WIN for the built-in lockout levers, though. Bit of a cheat, as the XLoc lever's only "built in" if combined with the MatchMaker X bar mount, but our underlying suggestion that there'd be some tight RockShox integration is right on the money - there'll be XX versions of RockShox's SID World Cup, Reba and (interestingly given the XCish slant of the group) Revelation forks. The XX bit includes Dual Flow rebound control with beginning and end-stroke damping adjustment and, more pertinently, the XLoc hydraulic remote lockout. That's right, no cables. You can adjust the Floodgate blow-off valve remotely too.

We said: ...given SRAM's recent acquisition of wheel company Zipp, we wouldn't be at all surprised to see XX marking the debut of an MTB wheelset.

They said: FAIL. Maybe next year, eh?

We said: Swathes of carbon fibre and ceramic bearings all over the place are pretty much certainties.

They said: A brace of WIN there, athough as there are no hubs in the XX group there's only the BB and rear mech pulleys to benefit from ceramic bearings. All the high-tech materials put in an appearance, with the rear mech alone including carbon fibre cages, magnesium and aluminium links and a titanium spring.

We said: SRAM's top-line Red road group made waves by coming in at under 2kg for shifters, brakes, chainset, BB, chain and cassette - around 200g lighter than Shimano's Dura-Ace. If we apply a similar sort of percentage margin to XTR, then we're looking at a target weight for XX of about 2.3kg, like for like.

They said: Another mighty WIN - here's a quick'n'dirty weight comparison of XX and XTR, as close to like-for-like as we can manage:

SRAM XXShimano XTR
Shifters183g255g
Cranks/BB754g1770g
Cassette185g224g
Brakes576g762g
Rear mech181g182g
Front mech118g129g
Chain260g304g
Total2,257g2,626 (+16%)

1 Weight for GXP BB - BB30 setup is 694g

2,257g is "about 2.3kg" in anyone's book. A direct swap from XTR to XX will save 396g (13oz). If you're in a position to use the BB30 crank, knock off another 60g (2oz). That's perilously close to a full pound - impressive stuff.

A lot of the weights are pretty similar, with mostly small margins over SRAM's Shimano rival. The brakes stand out as being startlingly light compared to XTR, though. The XX brakes use a new two-piece forged magnesium caliper, a two-piece aluminium/steel rotor, a forged magnesium lever body, carbon fibre lever blade and titanium bolts throughout. They share the TaperBore technology and tool-free pad contact adjustment with Avid's Elixir brakes. Rotor options are 185 or 160mm both ends, with an extra 140mm option for the rear.

Oh, and we said: "One thing that we'd be very surprised to see is any kind of HammerSchmidt-style planetary front transmssion - given the state of play at the moment, it's hard to see them getting the kinds of ultra-low weight and high efficiency that the XC race market will demand.

We're not going to give ourselves a WIN for accurately speculating about what won't be featured, though. If that was the game then winning would be easy - we'd have predicted a complete absence of pickled herring in the shifters, crankarms bereft of windows in the sides so you can see the tiny plastic beads inside rolling from one end to the other like a pair of high-tech rainmakers as you pedal and no bar-mounted herb garden. And that'd just be silly.

So totting up, we give ourselves a six-pack of WIN and a mere triplet of FAIL, leaving the tiny helicopter blades atop the Bikemagic Hat Of Wild Speculation spinning with pride. But what of SRAM XX itself? Where will it find itself on the win/fail spectrum? Well, with that kind of weight advantage over XTR it's got to be a win. 10-speed in the dirt is likely to be controversial, but it gives you a simpler twin-ring transmission with the range of a triple and about the same number of actually usable gears since you can get the whole cassette from either chainring. Time will tell how well it holds up.

As for price, it's looking like $2,400 and upwards for a full SRAM XX setup - we'll have to wait and see for UK prices. One thing's for sure - just as SRAM's X.0 gave Shimano a lot to think about (and resulted in the current generation of XTR), so XX will have the Big S pulling out all the stops...

Find out more at www.sram.com.


Previous article Previous article:
Crud Fast Fender
Next article:Next article
Watch Fort William Live here

Discuss this story

No gripshift is there. Ironic/amusing. But hey.
Posted: 04/06/2009 12:00

I'd kind of forgotten that they even did Gripshift :-/

[edited for Freudian typo]


Posted: 04/06/2009 12:17

Gripshift the pros choice.
Posted: 04/06/2009 12:25

Xloc remote sounds interesting...won't work with an existing Lyric I assume?

Mayeb Shimano will start doing forks!


Posted: 04/06/2009 13:03

It'll be interesting to see if the weights are as claimed or up to 16% more as for some of their roadie bits on weightweenies.
Posted: 04/06/2009 13:33

Some chap on Weight Weenies suggests that Grip Shift will appear within the next few months. Allegedly he has a source!
Posted: 04/06/2009 13:39

There are a lot of people in the know on cycling forums Nick
Posted: 04/06/2009 13:43

won't work with an existing Lyric I assume?

Nope.


Posted: 04/06/2009 13:48

Mister Bump wrote (see)
There are a lot of people in the know on cycling forums Nick


Damn straight - we are all authorities on everything round here.

I hear a pedal actuated shifter is in the works.


Posted: 04/06/2009 13:50

Some chap on Weight Weenies suggests that Grip Shift will appear within the next few months.

Hat of Wild Speculation says no


Posted: 04/06/2009 13:58

I hope they don't bring back gripshift - those Wavy shifters I had years ago were pants
Posted: 04/06/2009 14:01

David Arthur wrote (see)
I hope they don't bring back gripshift - those Wavy shifters I had years ago were pants

That was Sachs, not SRAM

Pre takeover wasnt it - similar, but shifted in the opposite way to SRAM

I've been trying to find a set of 800-X-Rays for a project bike


Posted: 04/06/2009 14:17

They've always shifted the same way. How much for two pairs of 800 X-Rays. One set is in good condition but the shifting is, was and always will be lousy.
Posted: 04/06/2009 14:27

Yes, your memory appears to be in better working order than mine Tim
Posted: 04/06/2009 14:35

I dunno Dave, theres a lots of IIRC in there
Posted: 04/06/2009 14:40

I seem to remember sachs waveys:

http://www.mtbr.com/channels/mtbreview/Images/Products/product_352906.jpg


which were a twist-shift system which shifted clockwise down the block

and SRAM gripshift (x-ray shown, the posh ones)

http://www.yetifan.com/gripshiftxray8.jpg


Which were THE gripshift and shifted anti-clockwise down the block

SRAM bought Sachs, and the wavy product dissappeared

I may have remembered the shifting thing wrong though


Posted: 04/06/2009 14:40

John Gourette wrote (see)
They've always shifted the same way. How much for two pairs of 800 X-Rays. One set is in good condition but the shifting is, was and always will be lousy.

Noidea, dunno how much they are worth - both pairs for a tenner (one set for spares)?

Just need to find an stx-rc groupset now!  That will be infinitley harder considering the chainset was made of cheese


Posted: 04/06/2009 14:43

The "posh ones" maybe but the 600s worked better and the black plastic was less prone to cracking that the clear stuff. Let's face it, they were all 'orrible.
Posted: 04/06/2009 14:46

Cheapskate! It'll take a better offer than that to get me to go to the trouble of changing them and paying postage from France.
Posted: 04/06/2009 14:48

he - i have no idea how much they are worth, and had no idea you were in France and assumed they were languishing in a toolbox, not in use!

The 600's were the ones that came on the bike, so they would be the proper ones i'd need, but the 800's look a lot nicerer


Posted: 04/06/2009 14:56

Tim, the Sachs Quarz groupset had a reverse-sprung front mech, which might be what you're thinking of. No difference in the shifter IIRC except that the numbers in the gear indicator went 321 instead of 123. The Wavey grips lived on on SRAM shifters for a bit.
Posted: 04/06/2009 15:29

I use X.0 Grip Shift on the Epic, I wouldn't use them on a 'trail' bike, but it's light, has a very snappy shift, lets you shift the entire block in one go, lets you 'trim' the front mech so it doesn't rub and is very tolerant of ham fisted shifting and nasty cables. They do have a lot of benefits. I've never shifted accidentally either, unlike with my X.0 triggers!

I like the hat of wild speculation idea though.


Posted: 04/06/2009 15:50

Probably exposing my lack of technical knowledge here, but would that 10 speed cassette fit on my current hub (running 9 speed SRAM)?
Posted: 04/06/2009 15:51

9 hours to CNC a cassette? Wastetastic!
Posted: 04/06/2009 15:58

Yes Oliver it will.

Surely as the cassette is CNC'd from one billet of aluminium it's less wasteful than machining the 8 sprockets individually? Time-tastic certainly!


Posted: 04/06/2009 16:14

Mike Davis wrote (see)
Tim, the Sachs Quarz groupset had a reverse-sprung front mech, which might be what you're thinking of. No difference in the shifter IIRC except that the numbers in the gear indicator went 321 instead of 123. The Wavey grips lived on on SRAM shifters for a bit.

Not entirely sure Mike.  I seem to remember spinning the RH shifter and the opposite to what i was intending happenin, although it could be my memory playing tricks or me being dopey on that fateful day

And no, I wasn't using rapid rise


Posted: 04/06/2009 16:16

Nick Evans wrote (see)

Yes Oliver it will.

Surely as the cassette is CNC'd from one billet of aluminium it's less wasteful than machining the 8 sprockets individually? Time-tastic certainly!

I'm assuming sprockets arent machined though - pressed?

CNC is very wasteful - hence the cost


Posted: 04/06/2009 16:17

Cash-Tastic.
Posted: 04/06/2009 16:45

the cassette is CNC'd from one billet of aluminium

Steel


Posted: 04/06/2009 17:03

sweet, I'll buy a lottery ticket then!
Posted: 04/06/2009 22:32

Shifters183g 255g

Cranks/BB754g 1770g

Cassette185g 224g

Brakes576g 762g

Rear mech181g 182g

Front mech118g 129g

Chain260g 304g

Shimano fans have nothing to worry about as they can curently run a 10-speed set as light as than the above SRAM.

  • The XTR crankset is lighter as soon as you remove the granny and a triple without a granny has a lot more rear tyre mud clearance than a narrow double. I'm all for a narrow Q on a roadie and all against it on an MTB. It works fine with a 10-speed chain.
  • A Dura-Ace front mech weighs about 80g on my scales and works fine on two MTB rings.
  • The SRAM cassette will work on an XTR transmission as will after market 10-speed titanium jobbies and SRAM's roadie 11/12-28.
  • Light chains are nothing new if you place no value on your ability to reproduce. The correct length of D-Ace 10-Speed chain weighs about the weight SRAM claim - 260g
  • The flat bar Shimano 10-speed shifters are a bit heavier but with what we've saved on the cranks and front mech............
  • I wouldn't buy either SRAM or Shimano brakes given that where I live there are long, steep descents. The Formula B4 SLs on Barbara's bike weigh 630g for the complete set with bolts, we'll see how that compares with the first set of SRAMs on weighweenies.

Advantage SRAM or Shimano? Personally I think it's quite sad that the marketing drive for more sprockets has finally got the better of the engineering good sense that is less sprockets - and it was the goons at SRAM I'll blame not Shimano. Just as it's always been Campa to raise the stakes in the roadie war of gears. From an engineering point of view there has to be a point at which strength/reliability/wear rate/efficiency/mud clearing compromises mean an extra gear is a bad thing.

There isn't a single gap in a 9-speed 11-34 Shimano cassette that I find too big so why would I want a 10-speed 11-32 or 36 cassette? How many of you out there already make multiple shifts up and down the block? Lots I suspect. Overly close ratios on an MTB are a pain. I used an 12-26 8-speed roadie cassette on an MTB but soon went back to the 11-28 as it made more sense even though a 26 was more than adequate at the time.


Posted: 05/06/2009 07:02

Just realised that the D-Ace mech needs to be band-on so it'll weigh only a few grams less than the SRAM.
Posted: 05/06/2009 07:55

Light chains are nothing new if you place no value on your ability to reproduce.

Agree with your final point there John - one reason I prefer XTR shifters is the ability to grab 2 or 3 shifts at a time because of the close ratios.  It's not like you can use all 27 on a 3x9 transmission anyway.  Perhaps the 2x10 means you can use every combination?  If so that's probably more usable gears than a 3x9!?

My antique roadie is a 2x5 which is almost enough for me - can't cope with steep hills  - so a 2x7 or 2x8 could easily work on a mtb.  Couldn't it?


Posted: 05/06/2009 08:43

Less is more - why are they increasing gears rather than decreasing?

Bring back 8 speed


Posted: 05/06/2009 08:51

I had 2 x 10 on my race roadie and replaced it with 3 x 10 not to get a bigger range of gears but to get acceptable chain lines in the gears I use most. On the roadie I was often on big ring third sprocket or small ring ninth sprocket and they both run poorly. With the combination of rings proposed by SRAM you are going to have some dire chain lines which with a bit of mud will have you chain sucking and skipping in no time.

Most riders with a 28/42 will have badly crossed chain lines at exactly the average speeds of enduros - you work it out (I have 22/28/42 on an MTB intended for winter triathlons so I do know what I'm talking about). I suggest buying the 26/39 intended for 29ers with the 11-36 cassette and riding big ring.


Posted: 05/06/2009 09:07

I showed my new Remedy to some roadies last year. I tried to explain the great new features like full floater shock, floodgate on the fork, really stiff link.....they couldn't give a monkeys and were more interested in discussing the new 11 speed roadie gears, and how it would improve their "granularity". Just so lame and as John says we have more important things to worry about like mud and the safety of your own knackers
Posted: 05/06/2009 09:25

Most of those roadies have adopted compact chainsets and spend 90% of their riding time on awful chainlines. Work out which gears you need for 90rpm and 32kmh with a (30)/39/52 and 12-25 and a 34/50. With the 39 you're on one-tooth jumps with a reasonable chain line. The chain line with 34/50 is unacceptable (to me) whichever ring you're on.
Posted: 05/06/2009 09:50

All valid points, although obviously many of them were raised with the advent of 8 and 9spd too Certainly I'm struggling a bit with the need for an 11-32 10spd.
Posted: 05/06/2009 09:56

The 32 (edit: gained when 9 came along) makes an excellent spoke protector. I keep meaning to grind the teeth off it to save weight but don't want to tempt fate; I've spent so much time recovering from injury over the last few years I've found a use for the 22-32.
Posted: 05/06/2009 10:08

Purely from an aesthetic point of view, does anyone else think it looks a little cheap?

If I were spending a small fortune on a brakeset I'd like it to be something other than a metallic paint finish...


Posted: 11/06/2009 20:56

Talkback: SRAM XX revealed

First Name:
Last Name:
Nickname:
Email:
Security Image:
Enter the code shown:

I agree to the site's Terms and Conditions & Code of Conduct:


Hot threads