The big news in the cycling tech world this year could be the potential release by SRAM of its brand new wireless groupset, which it has been working on for several years and was first spotted in the wild early last year. The prototype groupset is currently being raced in the Tour Down Under by some of French AG2R squad, which is where this video comes from.
This is the first time we’ve seen a video of the new groupset actually in action. The video shows an AG2R mechanic setting up a team bike with the wireless groupset. Now, it's clear that the mechanic is setting up the limit screws on the front mech causing some dropped chains, but apart from that what we can determine from the video is not only does the groupset work, but it provides very sharp and quick gear changes.
Also apparent from the video is that the rear mech doesn’t appear to have changed much from the first photos we saw last year, suggesting that SRAM was pretty close to production last year. The parts might even be production level, they certainly don't look like they've been hastily knocked up with a CNC machine. There’s the same large black unit at the back of the mech, which we must assume houses the battery and communication sensors.
.jpg)
When is SRAM going to release the new groupset? Our guess, given its debute at the TDU and how ready it looks, would be a rollout at the Tour de France. That's the obvious place to launch it, but they could launch it sooner – some of the teams can be hesitant about using new and untested kit at such an important race as the TDF. The groupset certainly appears ready for production, and the fact a few of the AG2R team appear to be using it, with no problems so far reported, is a good sign of its readiness.
SRAM is late to the electronic groupset market, but it does look to have made up for that with the introduction of arguably the biggest advance in groupset technology: the elimination of gear cables and wires. Reliability is going to be the key to its success though. Ever had problems getting your heart rate monitor to sync with your Garmin, or a flaky WiFi connection when you're trying to send an important email? You don't want to be in a bunch sprint and your wireless groupset being unresponsive do you now.
[Source: Bikerumour]
46 thoughts on “Video of new SRAM wireless groupset in action”
I guess it will be battery
I guess it will be battery powered. The question is how long will it last and are they replaceable.
multifrag wrote:I guess it
Given the apparent lack of wires leading into the mechs from anywhere *, i’d say you’re possibly on to something 😉
* Well, and also the bit saying “There’s the same large black unit at the back of the mech, which we must assume houses the battery and communication sensors” might give a bit away maybe.
I know everybody’s heard this
I know everybody’s heard this complaint many times before already but: why?
Wireless is useful in places where the risks – accidental or delibrate interference with the signal, the cost of extra hardware to deal with that, need for multiple independen power sources – are offset by the ability to move components relative to each other by an amount wires could not deal with. That’s pretty much it. (okay, or if it’s over long distance and you don’t have the money for laying wire).
Erm, I don’t need the components here to move relative to each other AT ALL. And they’re removed by less than a metre. This is like putting wireless between a computer’s RAM and its CPU.
nuclear coffee wrote:I know
Aside from the normal marketing bollocks, I think few of the perceived benefits are
– consistent shifting, e.g. no effects from wire degradation or stretch, housing compression, grit/rust ingress and so on
– potential for more simplified maintenance (less often, more technical/expensive)
– potential for simpler frame design
Clearly all of those have flip sides even if some of the benefit turns out to be real, and it seems maybe a bit of overkill to me – but it might turn to be good.. be interesting to see how it pans out. Whatever happens it’s hardly likely to be made mandatory so it’s just another choice.
I really don’t think the relocation thing is any part of the design decision.
Oddly enough, stuff not too dissimilar to that has already been done…
Is it just me or is there
Is it just me or is there something that causes cyclists to be really negative. It’s not unique to this website although it does seem strangely prevalent here.
When groupsets went from 7 to 8 to 9 to 10 to 11. At every stage if that there were naysayers and doommongers predicting broken chains every shift, “7 gears is good enough for [insert name of famous cyclist]” style comments. When electronic shifting appeared, the same sort of people predicting flat batteries, riders being stuck in top gear. Now with hydraulic disc brakes, people predicting mass pile ups, amputated fingers…
Wireless is no different to a mobile phone talking to a transmitter except that its not doing it over a range of 2km, it’s less than 2 metres. It’s not exactly new technology. Do your phone calls get jammed with other people’s? No. So why is there a problem here?
Honestly, the hysteria that goes with any new invention, it’s wonder some of you are not still riding round on penny-farthings saying “ooh, I’ll give it a few more years yet, want to avoid any of these new-fangled fads”.
Quote:I know everybody’s
Because the way that technology is moving it’ll be frikkin awesome 5 years.
“frikkin”!!….you been
“frikkin”!!….you been watching too much “Gold Rush” 🙂
Coming soon to a sportive
Coming soon to a sportive near you…
crikey wrote:Coming soon to a
Yup, I’m holding off my next frame/groupset upgrade until this comes out with hydraulic disc brakes then I’m good for a few years. Do I need it, no, but that’s the beauty of cycling in the 21st century.
4 tiny batteries to charge.
4 tiny batteries to charge. Didn’t work for Mavic.
drmatthewhardy wrote:4 tiny
Not sure the battery was the reason Mektronic didn’t take off 15 years ago (if that’s what you mean). I’d also hazard a guess that the comms battery won’t be the reason this one succeeds or fails.
@fukawitribe it’s not just
@fukawitribe it’s not just comms is it. If it’s wireless then the actuation is also battery powered. That’s the promise of ‘bolt it on and go’ if I’m not mistaken. And battery-powered actuators was one of the problems of Mektronic. My nephew has a NOS set on his vintage Look KG196, no end of problems. Underpowered, basically.
drmatthewhardy
I’m not sure I follow… i’m assuming you’re not saying that battery operated actuation of the mechs might be an issue per se – years of sucessful use of EPS and Di2 with amateurs and professionals would give the lie to that.
If it’s specifically this groupset then if I understand things correctly the front mech is actuated by an internal battery and the comms / local logic etc is handled by the clip in battery – and if so, that’s not really any more power/hardware requirement than current EPS/Di2 + a couple of ANT+ sensors. I may be wrong on that, so if anyone does know for sure the actual hardware specs i’d love to know any details they have.
The rear mech does have more to do – both comms and actuation – but the battery looks pretty chunky. Also, as PaulJ said, batteries have also come on a long way since the ’90s. We’ll get to see what the lifetime looks later this year I guess, but as far as actuation quality is concerned I think the fact that Bissell ran the groupset without incident in the ToC 2014 and AG2R have agreed to use it during races indicate it’s probably up to spec.. at least for the race duration.
I didn’t say it didn’t have battery issues, I said it wasn’t the only reason it didn’t take off. I have no direct experience of it but from what i’ve read/heard in the past there were also mechanical issues (e.g. recharge peg in the chain) and usability issues (e.g. pedalling required to shift).
fukawitribe wrote:If it’s
To maybe answer my own question, found this on the recent CyclingNews report
..so looks like I had it wrong on the front mech and that battery is doing both comms and actuation – odd, as there still appeared to be a wire off the front mech heading toward the frame in recent photos; perhaps they weren’t so recent or something. Mea culpa.
No probs @fukawitribe.
All
No probs @fukawitribe.
All you others with faith in tiny batteries: how long does your iPhone battery last if you are using it full time?
Is the wire coming of the top
Is the wire coming of the top of the mech leading to a battery elsewhere on/in the frame?
pastaman wrote:Is the wire
As far as I understand it from the coverage last year, the motor for the front mech is powered from the internal frame battery (à la EPS/Di2) and is connected by wire – and the battery for the comms bit of the mech is in the bit at the back of the black box that looks like it un-clips. Some of the articles from last year (e.g. the photos in BR of the Bissel bikes in the ToC) show this better. Examples in the 3rd and 4th pictures here
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/article/fresh-look-at-sram-wireless-electronic-group-42174/
Double post
Double post
fukawitribe wrote:pastaman
There are no wires – the wires were ‘decoy’ ones fitted to earlier prototypes that wereused at several races last year, such as the Tour of California. If I remember correctly, SRAM made a big splash about removing the fake cables half way though the ToC. The photo in this article of the rear derailleur is an old one, with the decoy cable still present.
The front mech appears to be using a similar clip on battery to the rear.
giobox wrote:
There are no
Yes, I remember the fake wires, but we weren’t talking about the rear mech and the newer photos of the front mech still show a wire from the top of the mech motor and the clip on battery (look in the photos linked). If it’s using an internal battery (which was discussed at the time) then it will still need some connection from the motor to that (see e.g. a Di2 front mech where the wire comes out of the front of the mech)
Yes indeed, but I don’t think you’d want the battery for the motor and the comms to be as small as the one on the rear of the motor. Might be wrong on that one, but seems on the wee side to me.
Woohoo!
Woohoo!
I’m not against the
I’m not against the technology but what are the possibilities for some sabotage in a TDF situation in the form of electronic jamming at the bottom of a climb?
offshore_dave wrote:I’m not
We’ve already looked at that in an article Dave, and the short answer is no. Read it here http://road.cc/content/news/119275-srams-wireless-shifting—-saboteurs-dream
Thanks for article (and
Thanks for article (and picture of Hedy).
I suppose a mass attack would still be good for a laugh for some joker.
No disc brakes? (sarcasm)
No disc brakes? (sarcasm)
Wireless sounds like a good
Wireless sounds like a good idea.
I’ve been working on Di2 since its original introduction, and a good number of problems customers have experienced have been related to E-tube wires, normally the wire running from rear mech to junction box, where the wire loop coming out of the dropout has been damaged (pinched / kinked/cut) in transit or other circumstance. The other common one was the wires running from Di2 shifters to handlebar junction box, becoming damaged.
Thats not an AG2R team bike,
Thats not an AG2R team bike, its a Trek Madone.
davsear wrote:Thats not an
So the Bike in the Video with FOCUS written large upon it and in the AG2R livery is a Trek Madone?
Really? =D>
JimRT57 wrote:davsear
He may have been referring to the old picture of the Team Bissell Trek at the ToC 2014 – also in this article – which seems to be confusing a few.
fukawitribe wrote:JimRT57
He may have been referring to the old picture of the Team Bissell Trek at the ToC 2014 – also in this article – which seems to be confusing a few.— davsear
Yes, the photos used in this article are the ones from last year, spotted on a Trek – we don’t yet have any photos of the wireless groupset on the AG2R bikes, because we’re not in Australia
davsear wrote:Thats not an
It’s an AG2R bike in the video – and yes you’re quite right, the photos show a Trek with the wireless groupset. That’s because we have used the photos from an article last year, when the groupset was first spotted on a Trek. We don’t yet have any photos of the AG2R bikes from the TDU
It has everything to with
It has everything to with patents. SRAM cannot use Shimano patented technology, because it is prohibitively expensive. So, they have to come up with something new… anything which is not patented yet (for example Double Tap).
I am quite sure this wireless technology is not solving a problem, it is just a workaround to avoid Shimano Di2 patents.
If this is done right won’t
If this is done right won’t it be possible to retrofit to almost any bike that takes SRAM or even Shimano with little or no complication of cable routing?
lots of batteries to charge,
lots of batteries to charge, hmmm.
Anyway it’s Sram I’m out, overpriced, fragile and unreliable.
mrmo wrote:lots of batteries
Although this is a sweeping statement, relating to SRAM’s groupsets I think you’re bang on the money.
Arthur Scrimshaw wrote:mrmo
Although this is a sweeping statement, relating to SRAM’s groupsets I think you’re bang on the money.— mrmo
I think you’re bang on the money about it being a sweeping statement.
fukawitribe wrote:Arthur
Although this is a sweeping statement, relating to SRAM’s groupsets I think you’re bang on the money.— Arthur Scrimshaw
I think you’re bang on the money about it being a sweeping statement.— mrmo
look at Srams aftermarket prices, then look at the reliability, there is a reason why they have been dropped by a lot of teams and manufacturers.
It might be a sweeping statement, but I can buy Shimano or Campagnolo and be reasonably confident the parts will work and last, Sram, well you might get lucky! granted the warranty service is pretty good but that is hardly a ringing endorsement.
I am also not even considering the fiasco over the disc brakes.
mrmo wrote:fukawitribe
Although this is a sweeping statement, relating to SRAM’s groupsets I think you’re bang on the money.— fukawitribe
I think you’re bang on the money about it being a sweeping statement.— Arthur Scrimshaw
look at Srams aftermarket prices, then look at the reliability, there is a reason why they have been dropped by a lot of teams and manufacturers.
It might be a sweeping statement, but I can buy Shimano or Campagnolo and be reasonably confident the parts will work and last, Sram, well you might get lucky! granted the warranty service is pretty good but that is hardly a ringing endorsement.
I am also not even considering the fiasco over the disc brakes.— mrmo
Road stuff seems to have a reputation for being light but brittle but, rather bizarrely, the off-road stuff seems quite well regarded.
fukawitribe wrote:
Road stuff
Not amongst people I know, customer service regarding Avid brakes is good, but it has to be, if you get a set that works fine, problem is finding that set!
break a mech and they are horrifically expensive, and the rear mechs have always been fragile and prone to self destruction when encountering sticks, jockey wheels have a habit of seizing up. The stuff is light, but if I am spending my money wouldn’t touch the stuff Shimano XT and SLX is bombprook in comparison.
Sram has good ideas, just get the impression that they rush to get to market, and this causes them problems.
Compare with Rock Shox, and since the Judy cartridges they seem to be ok and haven’t really got a history of screwing up, so why two bits of the company can be so different I haven’t a clue.
fukawitribe wrote:Arthur
Although this is a sweeping statement, relating to SRAM’s groupsets I think you’re bang on the money.— Arthur Scrimshaw
I think you’re bang on the money about it being a sweeping statement.— mrmo
I suppose that explains the popularity of SRAM with cross riders eh – where derailleurs are considered expendable items eh?
In all seriousness I cannot understand this rational. Force and Red look much nicer than ultegra and perhaps Dura-Ace. I’ve never had issues with SRAM 10 or 11 Speed. They are considerably lighter and the shifting in my experience is faster (much shorter throw on the lever…. so…
SRAM pricing is really high in the UK, but if you look around you can get prices around the same as Shimano. Lighter, better looking, better performance…
mrmo wrote:lots of batteries
No reason these units couldn’t be self powered. The rear derailer could tap power from one of the jockey wheels and the front derailer could be charged by the rotation of the cranks or by a BB dynamo.
SRAM have a patent describing
SRAM have a patent describing wireless shifting, which presumably is at least the basis for the production technology. I have an analysis of the logical control protocol at http://paul.jakma.org/2014/08/26/srams-wireless-bicycle-gear-shifting-protocol-analysis/ .
Quick summary: It should be pretty safe from direct hijacking, and it should be somewhat robust to noise due to low bitrates and repeated message sending. However, should messages be lost (prolonged noise, weak radio signal) then it could result in strange behaviour, like the wrong mech shifting, or both shifting at once.
That’s not so much due to the use of radio, but down to the fact SRAM have chosen to make the buttons control shifting in a way that makes the network control protocol complicated.
They’ve chosen to use just one one button on each shifter to control both mechs. Which means the mechs need to decide which one the shift is intended for based on whether they receive a message from one or both shifters. This makes the control protocol far more fragile to message losses, and weird behaviour should it happen.
Had SRAM chosen to have one shifter be dedicated to one mech, e.g. with 2 buttons on each shifter, then it would be simpler and more robust.
How it will fare in practice in the real world, we shall find out!
Details above.
So, it’s not good for
So, it’s not good for triples. That’s going to hurt their market about not very much at all.
I guess I am interested,
I guess I am interested, purely as the owner of a non-Di2 drilled titanium frame, who is persuaded by some of the arguments in favour of electronic shifting, but doesn’t want to get the drill out, or have fugly black tape all over the bike. The question of how to site batteries, esp if they need to be internal, but I would have thought there would be quite a lot of interest from owners of high value (cost or emotional) frames who want to look at this
It’s a funny thing brittle.
It’s a funny thing brittle. Mine just keeps on going. Apex, about 15000 miles, all weather.
Red on my good bike, flawless.
drmatthewhardy: Batteries
drmatthewhardy: Batteries have advanced a *lot* since the early 90s.