All

It might help if when people spoke about gearboxes they phrased it in a way that expressed why they thought they were a good idea, as opposed to screaming at people about why they were wrong about gearboxes.

Dudes in their mid 30s will shit on Lycra then go out wearing skinny jeans. Brother the call is coming from inside the house!

Two words in the title of this thread make everything relevant and on-topic. Tech and innovation. If there was strictly a “tech rumors” thread, it would inevitably discuss the technology that a product is competing against or replacing. There’s really no way around it. If you aren’t going to discuss the relevance of a new product or innovation, then what’s the point? As far as Ebike derailments go, the separate thread is nice. But you have to argue that 90% of the tech and innovation in MTB right now is because of Ebike market dynamics.

This is my last post on this, I don't really want to derail anymore than I have, but I think you need to consider more than just the technical aspects here. There are issues with the technical stuff, but business and user experience are just as, if not more, important when you consider adoption of new innovations (any innovation, not just gearboxes). As a user, if I have a Pinion gearbox fail or need service, that means it has to be removed from the bike and replaced. Who is doing that? How long am I going to be out of...

@dwhere you're better off starting new threads for new topics. tech rumors and long-form threads aren't very efficient these days

Everybody serving the gearbox coolaid and how ebikes are getting them and how that will trickle down to pedal bikes, remember that the Avinox and Gaobao or whatever they are called have a CVT gearbox using two electric motors. That kind of a "gearbox" (integrated variable transmission to be precise) is wholly incompatible with bikes that do not have batteries. The only viable gearbox option covering both ebikes and bikes is the Pinion which is, functionally (speaking in volumes), non existent in both camps. As @Shinook and @Uncle Cliffy have said, the future has been promised for years now with...

Gearboxes, the “fusion energy” of MTB.

Try 25 years. Ever since the first Rohloff hub integrated frames that Nicolai built. I agree that I don’t think they will see widespread popularity, but the key ingredient to their design is how tough and low maintenance they are. All you really have to do is change the oil. Anecdotal example is a friend of mine who has an Archibald. Hasn’t had to do anything to that gearbox, and he’s been pounding it for two years The benefits go beyond just a broken rear derailleur. No more clutching that contributes to suspension action, and there’s a lot of sprung...

People have been saying gearboxes are the future for what, a decade now or more? I think they are really cool and innovative, but they aren't going to see widespread adoption or replacement of current drivetrains. They are heavier and less efficient, the frame also has to be built around it, which means if you don't want it for some reason, that frame is out for you. They are more complicated to maintain, shops don't have the expertise to deal with them widely across regions, and do the smaller brands like Pinion have the facility to deal with large scale...

All the reviewers who rode that bike (Priority) said it was a slog to ride, but got slightly better over time with miles put on so the gears break in. I wonder if there's a reason that Pinion doesn't pre break-in their gearboxes before shipping them out. It would likely make the consumer experience much better.

BEATS having a REAL job.

Bike industry surprises everyone with new tech. Forum discusses its innovative nature and implications. Members start complaining about the relevance. Rinse and repeat.

If they didnt leak and Unbalance themselves, They've be a great set of brakes.

I think part of the problem is that "MTB" covers a really diverse range of riding styles, and for the different styles, a variety of engineering requirements and interests. It's easy for people (myself included) to only consider the style(s) of riding they do when they promote or bash posts. I agree that there might be interesting trickle-down technology from the latest "moped" innovations in MGUs for predominantly gravity-driven forms of pedal MTBs. While the idea of a gearbox that is comparable in weight in efficiency to a conventional 1X drive train is exciting, from the engineering side of things...

does this track really seem too "straight" or not raw? with all rider comments being "best track of the year!" and "finally a real track!" i take that to mean it's rough and rowdy, not some bikepark thing. is it because there are some berms to keep things moving?

would it fit? : )

Know of any carbon XC bikes that use a gearbox? For the downhill and adventure crowd, gearboxes may be a reasonable solution, but the current offerings are not great for those of us that like to pedal a lot. Maybe they'll get there eventually, but at the moment they would add about 3.5 lbs to my 22 lb bike, while costing me a bit on efficiency. I'll stick with the 1860's technology until something observably better comes along.

xynradital

It's not the bearing. It's the chain wrapping onto and off a sprocket. With a small idler, the angle each link has to rotate is very large. And it's happening in the taught part of the chain unlike the rear derailleur. But I've explained everything in my original long post. Now this debate, besides being offtopic, has serious vibes of trying to explain things to @seanfisseli, so much so I was convinced @Trocko might be an alterego. Looks like I was wrong about that one 🙂