# 2011 Shimano XTR and XT and 2011 Sram X.0



## eliflap (Dec 13, 2007)

http://thebikeblog.de/2010/01/19/shimano-xtr-2011-sram-x-0-2011/


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

That´s cool stuff but 2011 stuff in 2010-01 already..


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Not so cool! 
Still no 10s Grip-Shift and i don't like the cranks of the XTR either.No good chainring options as well.

44-30
42-30
40-28
38-26


----------



## vladxc (Jan 22, 2009)

hope that there are just rumors... because yet I kinda don't like the look


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

Why no 40-27? Despite that, I really like the looks of the cranks. However, final verdict is made when I see the weights.


----------



## dougal.s (Mar 13, 2006)

quax said:


> Why no 40-27?


Because Shimano are hoping you'll take the hint and man-up!


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

So why 38-26 then?


----------



## dougal.s (Mar 13, 2006)

quax said:


> So why 38-26 then?


That's the option for those that fail to man up.


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

the XTR equipment list


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

The 40/28 should be enough for most racers on 26" wheels and the 38/26 is great for the 29er folks. Go up or down as needed for your ability and strength.


----------



## IM31408 (Dec 24, 2008)

At first I thought the XTR crank was hideous, but it's starting to grow on me already and I'm sure it will look much better in person. The X.0 group, however, looks awful. I can't get this image of the shimano parts used on walmart bikes out of my head because of all the black and the cassette's largest sprocket being black, which is what the very cheapest shimano cassettes have. But other than looks, I have high hopes for weight on both and hopefully shimano can make an actual lightweight crank unlike what SRAM did to the XX crank.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

briscoelab said:


> The 40/28 should be enough for most racers on 26" wheels and the 38/26 is great for the 29er folks. Go up or down as needed for your ability and strength.


These chainring offerings need a 36 cassette which is NOT what we weight weenies are looking for.Besides that the 36 cassettes have larger gaps between gears...i don't like both the higher weight and the gaps of those large cassettes!

I prefer somewhat smaller rings up front and 32 max 34 cassettes in the rear.This gives me a low enough gear while still offering a closer spaced drivetrain.

No wonder FRM sells their 2x9 kits in just 26/40 or 27/42. That's the sizes also used by the Swisspower Pros (Schurter and Vogel) and i doubt those have weak legs

Anyway - looking at these XTR cranks and not seeing chainring bolts on the outside makes me wonder if Shimano as well offers these cranks with a proprietary, custom BCD which again would make these cranks just a one way ticket: once worn you have to get the proper rings and pay the huge check...


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

Nino, I really don't think most races would need a 36T rear cog with a 26 in the front. A 28 with a 34 in the back would be pretty nice. I ride 11-32 9 speed now (with 28/40T rings) and don't mind the gaps in the gears (some people do/might), so an 11-36 would not have any larger gaps than I'm used to... just a lower gear. The 11-34 10 speed would actually have smaller gaps than I'm running now. 

I think that if you need the 26T, that a 38T big ring (with an 11T cog) is more than big enough gear for anything you'll encounter in an XC race and general trail riding. 

The XTR cranks look to be normal BCD, but are using the hidden chain ring bolts like the current model Dura Ace and Ultegra road cranks. (Could be wrong though) So, you could still run whatever rings you wanted on them.


----------



## B_H (Oct 29, 2006)

nino said:


> Besides that the 36 cassettes have larger gaps between gears...i don't like both the higher weight and the gaps of those large cassettes!
> 
> I prefer somewhat smaller rings up front and 32 max 34 cassettes in the rear.This gives me a low enough gear while still offering a closer spaced drivetrain.


Hmm, don't know what are you referring to when saying that those 36-cassettes have bigger gaps between gears  ?
At least Sram 11-36 XX cassette is 11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36 and that's exactly same as 11-32 cassette plus the extra 10th gear which happens to be 36!!!

I like that Shimano is bringing also more than just top end group with 10speed, hopefully that will lower the prices .


----------



## cale399 (Oct 18, 2008)

I think if you are like me running XTR w/FRM 40/26 and 32/11 2x9 you go to 42/28 and 36/11 and gain that extra 10th speed and actually have one extra/new granny gear...alos on the wgt side, I hope that the XTR crank is lighter than my setup( you would think so...) so I see it as a win/win

also the one crank y'all are talkng about has no bolt showing(on the right) but the one on the left does show them...so we'll see also interesting note, shifters are not in pic!?! or brakes...


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

The gaps between gears would be bigger on a 11-36 9 speed but spread on 10 speeds, it's just fine.

I have a feeling the XTR crank wont be specially light... They should have made a BB30 version.


----------



## jbsteven (Aug 12, 2009)

also that pic doesn't really look like a Shimano type picture. 

I'm sure if this is a Shimano released pic then more details will come soon.


----------



## Roadsters (Jul 7, 2008)

Here's a link to the Google English translation of that page.

Those new cranks just make me appreciate Cannondale Hollowgram SL cranks even more. I wonder if it would be physically possible to design and machine a bottom bracket spindle that would allow you to use them with an XTR-style external bottom bracket in an English-threaded (not BB30) bottom bracket shell.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

Yes, once you have Hollowgram SL, every new high-end crank release seems like a joke, always heavier, never stiffer. But, you can already use Hollowgrams on non-BB30 frames, there are spindle/bearing/cup kits to do so...


----------



## glance2 (Jul 24, 2008)

I was wondering why so much Shimano was on sale recently. Looks like they might be reducing inventory to make space for the new 2x10 lines. 

Is it best to hold off any purchases until the new stuff is released? Interbike maybe?

Hopefully, the 9 spd stuff should drop even more in price.


----------



## Roadsters (Jul 7, 2008)

Dan Gerous said:


> You can already use Hollowgrams on non-BB30 frames. There are spindle/bearing/cup kits to do so.


Which companies specifically?


----------



## HAL 9000 (Apr 4, 2008)

Roadsters said:


> Which companies specifically?


i think this is what Dan is talking about

http://www.cannondale-parts.de/epages/61764971.sf/en_US/?ObjectPath=/Shops/61764971/Products/KP094


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

That's it... Basically, you get Zipp Vumaquad cups that use BB30 sized bearings but outside the frame and a special spindle that has no disc-side stop... It probably ends up a few grams heavier than with a true BB30 setup but still much lighter than XTR and XX cranks.


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

nino said:


> Anyway - looking at these XTR cranks and not seeing chainring bolts on the outside makes me wonder if Shimano as well offers these cranks with a proprietary, custom BCD which again would make these cranks just a one way ticket: once worn you have to get the proper rings and pay the huge check...


It makes me wonder too.
Properitary stuff is not a proper way to go, but if the chainrings are stiffer and lighter than previous generation - cheaper too so maybe it can be a success but with XTR you get premium stuff with a premium price tag.

XX is sure quick shifting but 80/120 BCD...


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

In the case of XX's 80/120, it was done to improve stiffness of the rings, the closer the bolts are to the outside of the ring, the less flex there will be (well, supposing the crankset spider is stiff). In this 2011 XTR crankset, it doesn't appear like the BCD helps stiffness at all. I don't mind new standards if they actually improve on current ones but... it wouldn't be the first time Shimano does something like that only to force people into buying genuine Shimano parts once they wear out... Maybe the outside ring is a hollow construction like Dura-Ace? That would make it stiff but... this new XTR, from that single picture at least, is not very impressive, technically and cosmetically. I don't have regrets about going with XX.


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

Dan: why not use 130mm it´s more common and use five arms, way much stiffer than four.

I don´t believe one wordabout 120mm is stiffer than previous generations, it´s only a way to make properitary stuff.

There´s 110 and 130mm bolt circles, proven and good five arms have proof to be stiff, I´ve made many light rings in five arm configs, harder to do in 4 arm and more failures too.


----------



## Dan Gerous (Feb 18, 2004)

Well, I don't work for SRAM so I'm just guessing but maybe 130 was too big for smaller rings? I know 39T can be mounted on a 130mm but with the chunky carbon spider on the XX, maybe it wouldn't... And 4 is lighter than 5. 

My point was more that the SRAM proprietary BCD makes more sense than the small proprietary BCD of that new XTR... if it is proprietary, it might be a standard 104, just with a proprietary fitting...


----------



## dougal.s (Mar 13, 2006)

cale399 said:


> also the one crank y'all are talkng about has no bolt showing(on the right) but the one on the left does show them...so we'll see also interesting note, shifters are not in pic!?! or brakes...


The crankset on the right is the triple, it has hidden chainring bolts. The one on the right is the double, which does not have hidden chainring bolts, I assume due to having a bcd too small to implement these.


----------



## diver160651 (Jun 18, 2007)

Current 10spd 32 or lower have closer spacing than the NEW 36 10spd cassettes.


----------



## sfer1 (Feb 22, 2009)

dougal.s said:


> quax said:
> 
> 
> > So why 38-26 then?
> ...


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

The 12T jumps in the double rings (aside from the 44-30) one is probably to do with shimano's classic tradition of not trying to shift more than a 12T difference with their mtb front derailleurs even though they'll do 14T fine, just like the road models have always done. The 42-32-24 triple ring size might suggest they're changing the BB bearings again which meant going to a larger inner ring to clear the outside of the external bearing setup. Otherwise there's no point in it other than it shrinks the total chain capacity needed in the rear derailleur a few teeth, and probably lets them resculpt and shrink the front derailleur cage slightly. Ironically its the same ring sizes the cheaper versions of shimano's compact mtb cranks had in the 1994-96 timespan. The 38-26 is probably meant as a double ring crank to be used with the 11-36 cassette by 29ers. A 38/11 on a 29" wheel is actually a harder gear than the 42/11 or 46/12 on a 26" and that was the highest gear most used for XC racing bikes in the early 90s. 26/36 on a 29er is slightly higher than 22/28 is on a 26er and for most xc riders/racers that's a pretty low gear as is.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

At first neither of these groups looked nice to me at all. After looking at them some more I'm really starting to like the XTR, not really digging the XO, though.
It'd be nice if the new XTR brakes had the same nice feel and looks but with a MUCH better weight.


----------



## vladxc (Jan 22, 2009)

COLINx86 said:


> It'd be nice if the new XTR brakes had the same nice feel and looks but with a MUCH better weight.


And maybe without the sticky pistons


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

Never had any issues with that here, so far... (knocks on wood)...now my Elixir's, that's a different story.

Back on topic, any news on 2x10 XTR?


----------



## rockyuphill (Nov 28, 2004)

Expect to see it on some of the pro race bikes at Sea Otter, but you likely won't see it for sale until Interbike/Eurobike.


----------



## vladxc (Jan 22, 2009)

Anything new on the Shimano XTR? The XT and SLX is pretty much the same as this year model. 

Hopefully the 9s transmissions will be cheaper


----------



## 1fgmtnbyker (Jun 12, 2004)

dougal.s said:


> That's the option for those that fail to man up.


If you going to man up then you should go Rigid/29er/SINGLESPEED


----------



## DavidR1 (Jul 7, 2008)

Sorry to dig up this old thread...any weights on the XTR Race group?

I searched but couldn't find everything I needed.


----------



## COLINx86 (Apr 8, 2009)

http://www.bikerumor.com/2010/08/08/2011-shimano-xtr-actual-weights-for-full-component-group/


----------

