New Shimano Dura-Ace 9100 breaks cover… and it's not 12-speed

tommow1 wrote:

if it is the new dura ace i peronally perfer the look of the current one and i hope they havent moved to battery packs in individual mechs because it is a dumb idea purely because you will never have any idea how much battery you have left.

Looks are one thing - each to their own and there really no wrong answers - but functionality is another. SRAM eTap is currently the only available wireless groupset with separate batteries, so it would seem reasonable to quote from a BR review on it regarding this.

Quote:

SRAM’s two-battery system seems to be the best thus far. The interchangeable batteries snap on easily, and are light enough (24g) that you could easily carry a spare in your saddle bag.

LED lights on the shifters and derailleurs give you a warning when battery life is running low. Green means full charge of 50-60 hours. Red means 5-15 hours left. And a blinking light means less than 5 hours.

While Garmin and SRAM haven’t finalized the details, eTap’s ANT+ compatibility means a low-battery warning on your Garmin will be a reality soon.

Note. The ANT+ Generic Control (CTRL) profile (and the light profile) already have battery level fields, so this is not really anything new.

tommow1 wrote:

The rear shifter and mech will always run out first so you will always be in a constant state of charging or replacing batteries at one point.

The battery life on the shifters is quoted as around 2 years, so even giving the manufacturer a certain leeway in that regard I doubt you'd be in a 'constant state' of charging or replacing anything for them - and when you do need to replace they're CR2032s so ubiquitous even if you weren't carrying spares. 60 hours/1000 miles on the mechs also seems OK, adaquate rather than outstanding hour wise perhaps, and the reviews we've seen so far seem to indicate that the battery life is at least good enough not to be a pain. Oh and the batteries are swappable so even if miss all the indications that your battery is running low and your rear mech battery runs out you can just swap it for the front to get you home... or pop your spare in if you have one. Doesn't sound like a particularly manic state of affairs to me.

tommow1 wrote:

I am all for electronic shifting but wireless and individual batteries just isnt viable.

Personally i'd say all the indications are not only that is _is_ viable, but that the current implementation is actually rather good - unless you have any pressing evidence to the contrary.

Bigringrider wrote:

Big XTR cage for the 'endurance' brigade and their 42 tooth rear cassettes.

Ah Mr. Rider - you come across as such a fabulous anachronism I never entirely know whether you're being serious or not ! I trust you run only the finest cork pads on your maple cane sprints

Looks like a through axle. I'm guessing that they'll have through axle hubs in the groupset.

Bigringrider wrote:

Big XTR cage for the 'endurance' brigade and their 42 tooth rear cassettes.

Lol! was that meant to sound condescending towards cyclists who ride up hills? Copying the gearing setups that pros use on relatively flat races always seemed to me to be a really stupid thing to do unless you really are as fit as a pro and riding similar or flatter terrain. Thankfully manufacturers are realising that not all cyclists are obessed with trying to replicate pro setups and producing gearing to suit normal people on varied terrain.

But then I should have known from your nickname that you think that riding a low cadence is manly.

Bigringrider wrote:

Big XTR cage for the 'endurance' brigade and their 42 tooth rear cassettes.

DaveE128 wrote:

Lol! was that meant to sound condescending towards cyclists who ride up hills? Copying the gearing setups that pros use on relatively flat races always seemed to me to be a really stupid thing to do unless you really are as fit as a pro and riding similar or flatter terrain. Thankfully manufacturers are realising that not all cyclists are obessed with trying to replicate pro setups and producing gearing to suit normal people on varied terrain.

But then I should have known from your nickname that you think that riding a low cadence is manly.

a compact is too small to climb on. There's no resistance on pedals in a 34 ring. A 39-25 is all you really need but a 36 with a 27/28 MAX should do anyone.

FJM1002 wrote:

 

a compact is too small to climb on. There's no resistance on pedals in a 34 ring. A 39-25 is all you really need but a 36 with a 27/28 MAX should do anyone.

36x28 is the lowest ratio for most of Team Sky in the mountains, so no, it won't "do anyone". Could you ride up the Giau in 39x25? Ventoux? Stelvio?

srchar wrote:

FJM1002 wrote:

 

a compact is too small to climb on. There's no resistance on pedals in a 34 ring. A 39-25 is all you really need but a 36 with a 27/28 MAX should do anyone.

36x28 is the lowest ratio for most of Team Sky in the mountains, so no, it won't "do anyone". Could you ride up the Giau in 39x25? Ventoux? Stelvio?

riders years ago rode those climbs in a 42-19

FJM1002 wrote:

riders years ago rode those climbs in a 42-19

Yep and you should go listen to some ex -pros (and more recreational riders of A Certain Age) talking about the difference between then and now regarding gearing. GCN happened to do a piece not long ago about double vs compact up the Mortirolo you might want to look at too. Some people like slower cadence /higher effort, some faster /lower, that's life - but your pronouncements are way too sweeping to be taken seriously.

FJM1002 wrote:

 

Bigringrider wrote:

Big XTR cage for the 'endurance' brigade and their 42 tooth rear cassettes.

DaveE128 wrote:

Lol! was that meant to sound condescending towards cyclists who ride up hills? Copying the gearing setups that pros use on relatively flat races always seemed to me to be a really stupid thing to do unless you really are as fit as a pro and riding similar or flatter terrain. Thankfully manufacturers are realising that not all cyclists are obessed with trying to replicate pro setups and producing gearing to suit normal people on varied terrain.

But then I should have known from your nickname that you think that riding a low cadence is manly.

 

a compact is too small to climb on. There's no resistance on pedals in a 34 ring. A 39-25 is all you really need but a 36 with a 27/28 MAX should do anyone.

Same sort of crap about triples being cheating, even though 30 / 25 is about the same as 34 / 28.

36 X 32 or 34 X 28 are not too easy to climb. The idea is not to crank the resistance up but too keep the revs up as if on the flat. More efficient and faster to climb this way.

But if you want to make things harder to be more manly, why not just shorten the brake cable so the pads rub all the time?

The wheels looks like c50 tubulars, judging by th DA Hub and the hidden nipples. Definetely Zipps, NOT.

pipikikinos wrote:

39/25 he says..... In which planet ?? :-P Max difer. is 16

We are talking about 39x25, as in 39t small ring, 25t large sprocket, not 39/25 chainrings.

pipikikinos wrote:

The wheels looks like c50 tubulars, judging by th DA Hub and the hidden nipples. Definetely Zipps, NOT.

I wasn't talking about them being Zipps, just saying that it looks like Shimano might have updated their rim profiles with the whole 'crosswind stability' thing

wycombewheeler wrote:

FJM1002 wrote:

 

Bigringrider wrote:

Big XTR cage for the 'endurance' brigade and their 42 tooth rear cassettes.

DaveE128 wrote:

Lol! was that meant to sound condescending towards cyclists who ride up hills? Copying the gearing setups that pros use on relatively flat races always seemed to me to be a really stupid thing to do unless you really are as fit as a pro and riding similar or flatter terrain. Thankfully manufacturers are realising that not all cyclists are obessed with trying to replicate pro setups and producing gearing to suit normal people on varied terrain.

But then I should have known from your nickname that you think that riding a low cadence is manly.

 

a compact is too small to climb on. There's no resistance on pedals in a 34 ring. A 39-25 is all you really need but a 36 with a 27/28 MAX should do anyone.

Same sort of crap about triples being cheating, even though 30 / 25 is about the same as 34 / 28. 36 X 32 or 34 X 28 are not too easy to climb. The idea is not to crank the resistance up but too keep the revs up as if on the flat. More efficient and faster to climb this way. But if you want to make things harder to be more manly, why not just shorten the brake cable so the pads rub all the time?

the idea of resistance on pedals is to allow you to put in a big effort. To go at anything upwards of 7 mph in a gear that small you would need to pedal at 120 rpm or higher which is actually a cadence not efficient to maintain.

Bullshit. You're doing over 7mph at 75 rpm in a 34/28 and at 85rpm in a 34/32 (assuming a 622-25 tyre). Go look at the typical climbing speeds and cadences on extended climbs on the pro tour for context.

fukawitribe wrote:

Bullshit. You're doing over 7mph at 75 rpm in a 34/28 and at 85rpm in a 34/32 (assuming a 622-25 tyre). Go look at the typical climbing speeds and cadences on extended climbs on the pro tour for context.

Yep.

Anyone riding anything approaching real hills (as in, those with sections of over 10%) more than once has to be able to go up those first hills at max 80% of FTP. On a 39/25 @ 75 RPM that would entail an FTP of around 6.25 W/kg. AFAIK there's only one guy in the world with a current estimated FTP that high at cadences anywhere near that low: Nairo Quintana. So we're talking to a guy that either (a) doesn't do real hills; (b) doesn't do them more than once a ride; (c) thinks that everyone should be climbing at less than 75 rpm; (d) isn't out winning grand tours because why bother; or (e) has really improved his English lately. 

I mean, if you enjoy griding away at hills should have at it. Seriously, as a spinner myself, I stare with nothing but awe at the guys who can will their fixie up (and down) hill after hill. But anyone who thinks that everyone else must always do the like is either ill-informed or facetious.

Broady. wrote:

Is  that a battery pack on the back... Wireless maybe?

edit: looks like a cable up on the stay, maybe not.

you can see a wire going to the rear mech. but then it could be a decoy, that's what sram did and caught some people out