I don't think that's a particularly good assessment...
As a number of people have pointed out in the comments, I think he has misunderstood how the derailleur is secured to the dropout (pinching the clevis around the dropout vs. clamping the inner plate and using the outer for radial support only). As a result, I think most of his commentary about alignment issues is moot. Axial positioning (axle frame of reference) should be no worse than a straight UDH, and far better than a bent one due to the pivot being concentric to the axle. Plus, as I understand it, they reference the cassette itself for axial position. Radial positioning will be subject to some tolerance stackup due to axle clearances and dropout tolerances, but this doesn't need to be super tightly controlled (is that stackup worse than typical variation in b-screw setting? Unlikely). Angular misalignment, again, yes subject to some tolerance stackups, but I tend to think they're pretty small. I think the issue with a typical bent hanger is more related to the offset between the axle and the derailleur mount, and the axial position that results from the bend angle rather than the angle itself.
I don't think his comments about the large bushing are particularly relevant, as the existing connection also has similar bushings.
Possibility for frame damage? Maybe, but I tend to think the way those loads are distributed with this mounting arrangement may actually be better. I think his talk about loads into frame pivots etc is nonsense.
I think he's absolutely right about the "magic wheel".
I'm somewhat optimistic that the derailleur design is an improvement, and by all accounts the shifting improvements sound great... I can't say I'm very happy to see no mechanical version released at the same time. As much as it may work well and there are some advantages, I'm just not really interested. Looking at the situation on the road side, and considering that some of the shifting "magic" may actually be in the shift programming, I'm a little worried mechanical could be gone for good at the top end of the range.
I'm also a bit dubious about some of the lack of backward compatibility... Changing to 8 bolt chainrings for power meter compatibility? GTFO!
March 22, 2023, 8:52 a.m. - JD
I don't think that's a particularly good assessment... As a number of people have pointed out in the comments, I think he has misunderstood how the derailleur is secured to the dropout (pinching the clevis around the dropout vs. clamping the inner plate and using the outer for radial support only). As a result, I think most of his commentary about alignment issues is moot. Axial positioning (axle frame of reference) should be no worse than a straight UDH, and far better than a bent one due to the pivot being concentric to the axle. Plus, as I understand it, they reference the cassette itself for axial position. Radial positioning will be subject to some tolerance stackup due to axle clearances and dropout tolerances, but this doesn't need to be super tightly controlled (is that stackup worse than typical variation in b-screw setting? Unlikely). Angular misalignment, again, yes subject to some tolerance stackups, but I tend to think they're pretty small. I think the issue with a typical bent hanger is more related to the offset between the axle and the derailleur mount, and the axial position that results from the bend angle rather than the angle itself. I don't think his comments about the large bushing are particularly relevant, as the existing connection also has similar bushings. Possibility for frame damage? Maybe, but I tend to think the way those loads are distributed with this mounting arrangement may actually be better. I think his talk about loads into frame pivots etc is nonsense. I think he's absolutely right about the "magic wheel". I'm somewhat optimistic that the derailleur design is an improvement, and by all accounts the shifting improvements sound great... I can't say I'm very happy to see no mechanical version released at the same time. As much as it may work well and there are some advantages, I'm just not really interested. Looking at the situation on the road side, and considering that some of the shifting "magic" may actually be in the shift programming, I'm a little worried mechanical could be gone for good at the top end of the range. I'm also a bit dubious about some of the lack of backward compatibility... Changing to 8 bolt chainrings for power meter compatibility? GTFO!