Next generation of SRAM RED eTap AXS

Back by popular demand, the general all-things Road forum!

Moderator: robbosmans

cajer
Posts: 673
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:26 am

by cajer

There are two different data sets there one in the link and one in the image... Alos the tests in the link are from mid to late 2021 at the earliest so they likely used an all axs drive train (seeing as they don't have anything that says otherwise and axs had been out for a while by then)

With the drip lubes, they they totally degreased and broke in the chain hand, with the testing in the link. So sram chains shouldn't be getting faster from additional break in

If a factory-treated chain, such as a UFO Racing Chain, that is pre-treated with an optimisation treatment from the factory, is the subject of the test, the manufacturer’s initial break-in instructions are followed, if applicable.

If a drip lubricant is the subject of the test, a pristine, yet well broken-in chain is used. Breaking-in a chain prior to testing removes the variable of the chain’s decreasing friction due to self-polishing during break-in, which would influence the results of the lubricant's effectiveness. The drip lubricant is applied to the cleaned chain per the manufacturer’s instructions. Also, any additional processes are followed as per the instructions, such as dry time, wipe down, layering, etc. It should be noted that Friction Facts uses a 3-step solvent ultrasonic cleaning process to ensure the test chain is completely stripped prior to lubricant application.

I would say the 13 hour results are not representative, as I don't believe they relubed the chains. So it's just a test of which chain holds onto the lube the best at that point, and it's rare that people will ride for 13 hours at 250w without relubing.

Seeing as there not a single data point that says sram chains are not slow (aside from sram themselves), it's safest to assume that they are slow

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



apr46
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:46 pm

by apr46

The 2w claim seems more like ~1w, once you look more closely at the data (and assuming you are wiling to run a Force chain, since thats also where you have more complete data vs. the incomplete Red test). These chains wouldnt be run freshly lubed except at the start of a time trial otherwise the 5 hour (in the link) or 6 hour measurement (in the table) is more realistic. Are you really going to relube after every ride? If not the 13 hour is probably more than the interval between relubing.

The link also shows that for the Silca polished and waxed chain at 5 hours the Force chain and the Shimano are near identical giving credibility to the notion that once used for a bit, the chains dont offer much between them, making the 2w claim look more like ~0w.

Then you have the the real-world contamination thing vs. a lab environment. All in, I dont think there is much of anything really here.

BigBoyND
Posts: 1347
Joined: Mon May 31, 2021 1:51 am
Location: Berlin, DE

by BigBoyND

morrisond wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2023 12:59 pm

A garbage test once again. Why did they treat SRAM differently than KMC?
Josh answered some of these points on another forum:
"I've seen this in a couple of forums recently since Dylan's video. It should be noted that this isn't showing the chains themselves getting faster or slower over time, but is really showing a combination of the lubricant getting faster combined with the lubricant holding ability (or lack thereof) of the chains. When they run this test they run it until the friction hits a peak minimum break point and then begins to increase again. As this was all done with wax based lubricants, you see that the wax gets faster as it's compressed, but then eventually gets slower as the solid lube is ultimately pushed out of the chain. The real takeaway should not be that X gets faster over time while Y gets slower but rather X holds wax lubricant longer.

The testing is done in 2 steps, they use a full drivetrain test machine called the FLT, then then remove the chain at set time intervals and run it on a machine called the FTT which is much more accurate and capable of finding much smaller differences, but is essentially a fixed gear single speed setup that holds a very controlled tension between cog and chainring, this way you are just measuring chain or lube and minimizing non-chain related losses like pulleys and bearings.

I know from pictures that they use DA rings/cogs for the Shimano test and for sure they will have to use AXS rings and cogs due to the different roller diameter on AXS chains. I'm not sure what level rings/cogs used here nor am I sure what they use for non Shimano chains, though I assume they just use the same DA rings/cassette that is used with Shimano.

To answer Trail's points, I'm not sure why the testing is done at these time intervals, but can assume that since the chain has to be removed to take the final data they do it this way to minimize the time and labor involved in the testing. Also remember, Ceramicspeed has all of their equipment and protocols designed around lubricant testing and development, so data sets like this are something they are throwing out there as an added service, but it's not their focus and I think it's fair to say that if you were designing a test to really look at specifics of the chains themselves you would do it differently. I imagine that the 13 hours is probably the norm as it captures the break point and pretty much all lubricant testing is done with DA chains as they test very fast, but are also extremely consistent in their manufacturing"

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12456
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

So it's time to ask the question of why SRAM 12spd chains are worse at "holding wax." Are the chains simply holding a lower amount of wax from the very beginning due to the tight manufacturing tolerances mentioned by CyclingTips?

bikeboy1tr
Posts: 1395
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:19 am
Location: Southern Ontario Canada

by bikeboy1tr

I have two Red flat chains waxed with over 400 km on their first wax each and even though they may not hold as much wax or lube I have yet to hear any squeaking noises that you would get with a dry chain. The first chain has 285km and the second has 150km and no squeaking so far. Until I hear more noise from the chain with regular lube cycles I wont worry about it and obviously if I do hear more noise I will increase the lube cycles. I like the Red flat chain and plan on staying with it as it works better than the Campy chain with my E.Dubied cassettes.
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=154188
2018 Colnago V2R Rim Brake
2019 Colnago V2R Disc Brake
2014 Norco Threshold Disc Brake
2006 Ridley Crosswind Rim Brake

apr46
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2021 1:46 pm

by apr46

cajer wrote:
Sun Mar 26, 2023 8:21 am
There is Ceramic Speed data https://www.ceramicspeed.com/en/cycling ... ing-chains and another set of Ceramic Speed data both with their UFO lube. Image
This data suggests that somewhere between 6.5 hours and 13 hours the DA and YBN chains need a re-wax vs. the Force AXS chain that just keeps getting faster.
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Mar 27, 2023 7:36 am
So it's time to ask the question of why SRAM 12spd chains are worse at "holding wax." Are the chains simply holding a lower amount of wax from the very beginning due to the tight manufacturing tolerances mentioned by CyclingTips?
I think its actually the opposite. The Force chain is much better at holding onto their lubricant and therefore remain packed with wax for longer.

That along with the notion that after the Silca diamond polish and hot wax, the Force AXS and DA chain are similar in efficiency, points to some difference on tolerance for new chains. This is from their data for the UFO Racing Chain, again data by Ceramic Speed.
Image

Seems to me like the most likely thing is that the AXS flat top chains are indeed "tighter," per Dave Rome's article, when new and this is the likely cause of what was observed in the testing. It also is likely why the Sram chains last longer.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12456
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

The DA chain sheds wax faster because of its Sil-Tec coating. I was more talking about the other chains like the KMC, which seems to be the fastest by far at hour 13.

RDY
Posts: 2354
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2020 10:31 pm

by RDY

Anyone got any further intel on new Red? Seems now like it won't be soon, despite Force having already been updated (slightly).

rollinslow
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 2:25 am
Location: New York

by rollinslow

RDY wrote:
Thu May 04, 2023 11:20 am
Anyone got any further intel on new Red? Seems now like it won't be soon, despite Force having already been updated (slightly).
I'm still really surprised we haven't seen the new/updates groupset. We are beyond 4.5 years out and even the articles about updated force mention the expectation for summer 2023 for red.

I have a spot for XPLR on a bike that this geoupset would be perfect for but do not want to buy an old groupset. The other page says 2024.
Moots Vamoots RSL (2019)-Super Record 12
Cervelo S1 (2010)-Super Record 12
Kestrel RT700 (2008)-Dura Ace 9000
Mosaic GT-1 (2020)-SRAM Red viewtopic.php?f=10&t=174523

Post Reply