How does SRAM rate to Shimano??

As per the title really. Looking in particular at SRAM X4 compared to Shimano EZ50 but also for general views on SRAM gears as I have little experience of them.
 

rh100

Well-Known Member
Don't know about the expensive stuff, but I bought a SRAM 7 speed cassette as it had a nice low gear (32t). I use it with a SRAM chain.. Both work beautifully with shimano alivio rings and rear derailleur, no problems yet and the gear changing on the back is really smooth, except for the jolt between the wider spaced lower gears,which I guess is to be expected.
 

Grasen

New Member
Location
CF24
SRAM chains come from the french SEDIS chains that were the norm in the old days.
Personally I have used them since the early 70's and can't fault them.
SRAM cassettes come from the french MAILLARD which also were the norm in the old days.
Can't fault them either.
SRAM gears come from the german SACHS which were also respectable in the old days.
Since then the whole lot has been through CAD programs to make them better, lighter, stronger.
So the short of the long is: ITS GOOD STUFF.
 

battered

Guru
SRAM is good gear. I prefer Sram chains to Shimano, easier to fix, no special rivets and maybe, just maybe, they are more tolerant of worn cassettes.
 

bauldbairn

New Member
Location
Falkirk
I've just bought a bike with SRAM X9/X7 mechs and I'm more than happy with their performance. In fact it has a full SRAM groupset if you consider Truvative and Avid are now SRAM companies(along with Rockshox). :tongue: :wacko:
 

buggi

Bird Saviour
Location
Solihull
i read in a cycle mag that SRAMs Red, Force and Rival were the equivalent of Shimano's 105, Ultegra and Dura Ace... can't remember which way round it is. Obviously the most expensive would be the Dura Ace equivalent and the price should be a good indicator of which order they go.
 

Steve Austin

The Marmalade Kid
Location
Mlehworld
Sram and Shimano are pretty much the same, although Sram cost more, don't last as long and are more fragile ime.
KMC chains last longer and run better btw

The clincher for me is cross compatibility, i've a few bikes and they all run Shimano, all the parts between the bikes work fine with each other. It all runs relatively maintenance free, is a piece of cake to setup, i can get spares for shimano in any shop, even halfords 'shudders'

Sram x4 is about the same as Shimano Alivio, and Alivio is a league ahead in design, weight than the Sram equivalent.
 

GrasB

Veteran
Location
Nr Cambridge
buggi said:
i read in a cycle mag that SRAMs Red, Force and Rival were the equivalent of Shimano's 105, Ultegra and Dura Ace... can't remember which way round it is. Obviously the most expensive would be the Dura Ace equivalent and the price should be a good indicator of which order they go.
RED = Dura Ace
Force = Ultergra
Rival = 105

IMO Rival is better than 105 & Force than Ultergra but that's a personal opinion. Also this has nothing to do with their MTB line.
 
OP
C

Crackle

..
Steve Austin said:
The clincher for me is cross compatibility, i've a few bikes and they all run Shimano, all the parts between the bikes work fine with each other. It all runs relatively maintenance free, is a piece of cake to setup, i can get spares for shimano in any shop, even halfords 'shudders'
Thanks Steve, confirms what the bloke in the shop was saying about spare availability and general setup issues with mixed componentry bikes.
 
Location
EDINBURGH
SRAM uses 1:1 shifting while Shimano uses 1:2, in practice this means SRAM are a little easier to set up for indexing and the indexing needs less adjustment over time, it does mean the gear changes can feel a little more "notchy" but I find that is a positive. That said, Shimano has pulled their game up over recent years so there is little to choose between them, I prefer SRAM but use both and my daily ride has Shimano shifters and derailleurs but with a SRAM chainset and KMC chain.

So I'm no help. :rofl:
 
Top Bottom