Could Shimano surprise us with fully wireless GRX/XT 1x?

[robertbb]

Thought bubble:

If Shimano's seeing the success of AXS on all-road/gravel bikes, and in particular with the release of 1x only APEX/Eagle (which I'm sure Shimano had intel of), might the delay with GRX/XT be something to do with the longer development time of an entirely new and fully wireless 1x system?

I mean Campy have gotten around SRAM's patents, surely Shimano may do so also?

[ooo]

may be they will do it for 1x13, but not for 1x12

shimano already has 1x12 di2 wired xt 1x12 RD-M8150 (it is firmware locked to e-bike right now)

why they would do new hardware if they can make a new product by using old hardware with firmware update?

last time they released 1x grx di2 rd it was old xt rd-m8050 with new firmware and minor hardware changes

fully wireless shimano setup will have even less runtime compared to semiwireless shimano setup

[ultimobici]

Bearing in mind GRX mechanical appears to use the existing 12 speed spacing and much of the current generation is interchangeable with road parts, I doubt Shimano will go wireless on GRX any time soon.

By excluding compatibility with R92XX, R81XX & R71XX they would damage the appeal of the new GRX. Being wired in the way it is has not hurt OEM take up on 12 speed Di2 on the road side, so why would it be any different on the Gravel scene?

As for Campag getting around the Sram patent, at what cost? £400 for two batteries that are mech specific isn’t a benefit. Once the bike is built wireless is an irrelevance. During the build it’s now a 2 minute job as the part they have eliminated is the part that was a PIA, the bars to battery link. They have made Di2 simple and quick to fit. If you’re having issues with that, you need to find a new career.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[robertbb]

Hmm, interesting points.

I'm thinking because Shimano's already got the wireless protocols developed (in use with 12sp Di2), it makes very little sense having a battery in the seatpost and running a cable for only one derailleur (rear), they may be working on an APEX XPLR equivalent - 1x only. Considering the history of MTB an GRX derailleurs being cut from the same cloth it may explain the delays....

[ultimobici]

Hmm, interesting points.

I'm thinking because Shimano's already got the wireless protocols developed (in use with 12sp Di2), it makes very little sense having a battery in the seatpost and running a cable for only one derailleur (rear), they may be working on an APEX XPLR equivalent - 1x only. Considering the history of MTB an GRX derailleurs being cut from the same cloth it may explain the delays....

If Shimano had gone down the filly wireless route on the MTB Di2, I’d agree. But seeing as their road Di2 and MTB Di2 both use a separate battery, it makes sense for them to use common parts.

As for following Sram down the XPLR rabbit hole, why do they need to create a wireless ecosystem? All they need do is create the cassette & mech.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RDY]

At the speed Shimano is currently moving, we won't see a wireless GRX before 2028 or 2029. But at that kind of glacial creep, their position may become untenable with the rise of Chinese competitors, and SRAM clearly intent on a much faster, more aggressive launch and product development cadence.

[robbosmans]

And moving the battery inside the frame keeps the derailleur nice a small, so less likely to catch on stuff. Why would you place a battery external on a derailleur when u have a hollow frame with lots of room?

[satanas]

Other than setting up triathlon or TT bikes after flights I can't see *any* advantage to wireless. You get higher cost, less battery life, more complexity, etc... I get that many people here think newer=better and that more expensive=better, but surely not everyone here is a fashion victim?!?