Many technological innovations contributed to the remarkable efficiency of the modern mechanical drivetrain. So, in 2026, have we reached the peak of what is achievable in a cable-actuated derailleur system? When it comes to the high-end bicycle stuff made and marketed by the big manufacturers the answer seems to be yes.
Professional road cyclists gave up on cable-actuated derailleurs years ago. Electronic shifting proved to be faster, more reliable, and lower maintenance. In the process, roadies got rid of the nest of cables at the front of the bike and went all in on full integration, maximising a bicycle’s aerodynamics and making a clean profile ubiquitous. Unsurprisingly these bicycles look much the same. But road racing bicycles - with few exceptions - have always looked much the same.
Outside of road racing, bicycles come in a multitude of shapes and configurations. Until recently they all wore mechanical drivetrains utilising either cable-actuated derailleurs or cable-actuated planetary gears located in the hub or bottom-bracket. The idea of removing the cable (typically a Bowden cable) and replacing it with an electronic system (using a switch connected to a servo and a battery) has been kicking around well before it became the gold standard for road racing bicycles. These days, there is general agreement that a modern, electronically-actuated gear system shifts better and is more versatile than a cable-actuated system. As these gizmos increasingly use short-range wireless technology (Bluetooth, ANT+), they seamlessly hook into a sophisticated ecosystem already shared by other connected “smart” devices (power meters, heart rate monitors, phones, GPS and speed sensors, suspension systems, etc). This generates useful, crunchable data about the human engine and the machine it is powering.
Electrification-enabled data flows and an era of high tech bicycling. Imagine that. While most of this tech is driven by the demands of racing, it also means the benefits are just around the corner for the average Joe. Some will like it and, importantly, be willing and able to pay for it. Some won’t. Bicycles have been evolving for two centuries. Thirty five years ago I remember riding Shimano 600 (6400 series) and thinking it was the very best thing in the whole wide world. I now know better. These days I am fortunate to own a number of bicycles. My two fastest bicycles are equipped with electronic shifting. I don’t currently own a bicycle with an electric motor but I ain't ruling it out.
Two weeks ago the Lego smart brick was released (https://www.lego.com/en-au/smart-play). Imagine that.
I think this might be the last year we see relatively affordable, ever reliable, high performance, mechanical Shimano XT M8100 sold on a production mountain bike.
Ouch.
Bicyclists are a diverse and often sceptical lot. So is this a technological concession, or nefarious marketing, or consumer demand? How did we get here? Is there a way to resist modern trappings without going full Amish? Is it worth the bother?
The latest itineration of top-end mechanical drivetrains from the big three manufacturers are:
SRAM MTB: Eagle XX1/XO1 (2016 - 2020 gear range update - )
SRAM gravel: Apex (2023 - )*
SRAM road: Red 22 (2013 - 2016)
Shimano MTB: XTR M9100 (2018 - )
Shimano gravel: GRX 820 (2023 - )*
Shimano road: Dura-Ace R9100/9120 (2016 - 2021)
Campagnolo gravel: Ekar (2020 - )
Campagnolo road: Super Record (2018 - )
*SRAM and Shimano came out with these dedicated 12spd gravel groupsets in 2023 but they weren’t marketed as top-end offerings.
Over the past couple of years SRAM has proven to be a formidable player. Four years ago a regular bicyclist looking for a new ride thought of getting a bike with Shimano because mechanical groupsets dominated and Shimano was the market leader. They might consider SRAM… as an alternative. Or even Campagnolo… if they were an older and had plenty of miles in their legs. But they started with Shimano because Shimano was the reference point. Things are different now. SRAM is the standout market leader in wireless, electronic derailleurs. At last count it had 4 wireless MTB groupsets and 4 wireless road and gravel groupsets, all released within the past 2-3 years. I might have undercounted and it’s hard these days to establish what is a new derailleur and what is a new groupset. In any case, SRAM has created a monster footprint for others to follow. In mid-2025 Shimano made a belated entry into the wireless, electronic derailleur market. Shimano released wireless systems in MTB (three tiers with Shimano XT in the middle) and gravel (two tiers), leaving the road market serviced by its “semi-wireless” derailleurs. There are plenty of rumours that Shimano will be releasing wireless road drivetrains later this year or in early 2027. Earlier in 2025, Campagnolo - a much smaller company - came out with wireless road and gravel groupsets.
To be clear: this isn’t the end of mechanical shifting. Far from it. It’s just the end of highbrow mechanical drivetrains on production bicycles. For those paying attention, that’s no big loss. Top-end stuff looks pretty, and fancy, and shaves a bit of weight but adds little additional functionality. Some commentators suggest that judicious selection of a coated cable here, or a sealed-BB pulley wheel there, makes any performance difference imperceptible. So there’s that. In any case SRAM and Shimano continue to support their top-end mechanical MTB groupsets. But, moving forward, there are no plans to deliver them on mountain bikes as OEM. The phasing out of Shimano mechanical XTR M9100 - and, more importantly, its much cheaper yet top-performing sibling, mechanical XT M8100 - on production mountain bikes marks a significant shift in the derailleur landscape. While there are still plenty of budget-conscious (lower-tier) bicycles fitted with mechanical drivetrains, the sportier end (mid-tier and top-tier) is increasingly filled by carbon fibre bicycles equipped with electronic groupsets. While Campagnolo continues to support the high-end mechanical road and gravel market it has a virtually non-existent OEM footprint.
This matters because optics matters. Carbon bikes make up the vast majority of the mid-tier to top-tier production bicycles. They are the most visible and arguably the most attainable, desirable, and aspirational bicycles for the majority of people who choose to pedal a bicycle for pleasure. Carbon moulds are expensive to tool up and wireless derailleurs are now mainstream. Moving forward, manufacturers who considered routing a mechanical gear cable low on a list of priorities can now scratch it off. Sure, this isn’t a complete wipeout (in the past two weeks Giant and Merida released new 2026 aero road bikes and the budget versions are fitted with Shimano 105 mechanical groupsets) but it does represent a hollowing out gutting of mechanical groupsets from the mid tier. They did it with road bikes. They are now doing it with mountain bikes. They are yet to do it with gravel bikes - which is yet another reason why “gravel” is arguably the true aspirational “do-it all, bike-for-the-people”.
The headline text is plain: the glory days of the flagship mechanical drivetrain has finally ended. Well, gone from the headlines if not gone completely. Look at the subtext and three things are evident: SRAM, a relative newcomer, aggressively marketed the wireless, electronic ecosystem and drove the technology forward; mechanical systems with close-range gear ratios were the first to succumb to the speed and precision of electronic systems; and legacy groupsets from Shimano and Campagnolo continue, for now, to have a certain stickiness.
Not to worry. The world is full of bicycles. They are a simple and efficient means of transport and the vast majority run mechanical drivetrains. Looking at new bikes, Shimano and SRAM continue to manufacture - and develop - mechanical groupsets and still provide them as OEM at the budget end of the market. New players like microSHIFT and TRP also sell mechanical derailleur systems. Bicycles have also been around for very a long time. Out in the wilderness there are a bazillion used bicycles, many of which are exceptional value for money. Most just need a bit of tinkering or a trip to the local bike shop. You might grab a bargain… then spend a motza on Campagnolo kit. At the quirky end you can get a Silver OM-1 rear derailleur from Rivendell, or a fancy pants Madrone Jab derailleur, or even a whole new Nivex derailleur system (including frame fittings and tubing) from Rene Herse. Rohloff and Pinion continue to sell quality mechanical gearboxes. You can think, “fuck this,” and ride single-speed. Or learn to ride a unicycle. The point is you don’t need to fret. Despite heavy marketing, no company is forcing anyone to buy into the electronic ecosystem. You have options.
But, there are hurdles. You need to know your shit be resourceful, patient, and mechanically-minded (or know someone who is). All bicycles need maintenance and the bicycle industry has been around a long time and evolved immensely. Groupset compatibility is an issue for those seeking indexed gears. Second hand stuff carries no guarantees for safety, reliability, or performance. If a trigger shifter doesn’t work after a simple lube (or a dunk in hot water followed by a re-lube) then they are monsters to work on. Derailleurs look pretty simple but worn bushings and bent hangers can be hard to pick. NOS (new old stock) is getting expensive. And god knows what you need to dismantle when you can’t easily identify that creaking sound under load. The more performance-orientated a bike is, the more frustrating and expensive the fine tuning gets. And, after all that, it won’t be the fastest bike. And it won’t have the best kit.
Some bicyclists are fine with that. Some are not.
I have been around bicycles long enough to witness some inflection points including the assimilation of clincher rims into competitive road racing; the phenomenon of road then off-road clipless pedals; the slow, painful demise of friction shifting (it ain’t dead yet - which is a good thing given the compatibility issues of index-shifting systems); the development of the brake-shift lever; the birthing of mountain bike suspension; the introduction of carbon fibre and the science of aerodynamics; the acceptance of disc brakes initially on MTBs, then - after initial resistance - on road-going bikes (not least for the fact that carbon fibre rims allow excellent aerodynamics but make for a terrible braking surface); and the demise of mechanical shifting in professional road racing. In 2026, I can confidently say that a bicyclist has never had it so good. But I would have said that 10 years ago, and 20 years ago, and 30 years ago.
Milestoned by the product but valued for its innovation - that’s technology in a nutshell.
Truth is, you don’t know you need it until you see it.
Today, the weak link of a cable-actuated gear changer is seen as its defining feature: the cable. It stretches over time, is prone to contamination, is affected by the number and acuity of the bends it takes as it travels from shifter to derailleur, and it requires compatible pull ratios in the shifter and derailleur for accurate indexing (a hardware issue that, theoretically, can be managed by a software update on an electronic system). But if you know what you are doing and/or resourceful it is also cheap, effective, replaceable, lighter and - for some people - easy to work on. If you want faster, precise shifting then an electronic shifter does this better. Even a lower-end electronic shifter will do this better than a high-end cable shifter. This mattered more for road racing cyclists (who change frequently across a range of gears, and - importantly - almost always run a front derailleur as well) than those who race off-road (XC racers also worry more about weight).
Performance upgrades in mechanical derailleur systems have also slowed. Over the past 10 years it is arguable that the only significant development in mechanical systems is the addition of an additional cog and the removal of the front derailleur in mountain biking (the “1x drivetrain” created and lead by SRAM). The problem with cramming more cogs into a rear cassette (currently maxing out at 12 or 13) is the precision and repeated reliability of the shift for which a neglected or poorly maintained cable is not particularly well-suited. Electronic systems are set-and-forget. Timing is also important. Personal transport is trending steadily into electrification with e-scooters and e-bikes and such-like. In January, the NRMA (a road and motorist association), published the results of a research group predicting that Australia will see the sale of 250,000-300,000 e-bikes in 2026 totalling over a billion Australian dollars in sales (https://www.mynrma.com.au/open-road/news/2026/australian-e-bike-sales-2026). Australia has a population of just over 27 million. That’s one new e-bike in 2026 for every 100 Australians.
When I was a kid a bicycle was something that didn’t move unless you pedalled it. Nowadays, we have bicycles with electric motors - some need pedalling and are assisted by a motor; some move even without the pedalling. These bicycles are necessarily equipped with a battery, the capacity of which easily accommodates the measly power demands of a gearing system. A regular, old-school bicyclist bemoaning the replacement of Shimano’s legendary XT, cable-actuated derailleur for an electronic version is missing the bigger picture: the bicycling landscape is changing. We now have electrification everywhere around us. Electrification has become an intrinsic part of modern life. In bicycling, we are also seeing a resurgence in innovation in planetary gears (also called gearboxes). While these developments are positive signs of progress, they are also indicative of a world increasingly comfortable with black boxes - the inner workings of which few people care to understand. In any case, the old-school pedal bike (now, curiously, referred to as an “analogue bike”) has competition. A well-informed, technologically-enabled, data-centric consumer has alternatives and substitutes depending on their perceived needs and desires.
The growth in e-MTB is particularly impressive.
(https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/e-mountain-bike-market)
And so we move to marketing.
The reason why marketing works is because - deep down, where it matters - we humans are more alike than we are different. We want to be valued and we want to show off. Yet we generally dislike the showoff. There are plenty of showoffs because the rest of us enjoy gawking, gossiping, commenting and judging. Flex the high value item or experience and people notice.
We pay attention to our own efforts and feel the impact of our challenges but we can only imagine those of others. When we overcome a challenge, we attribute our effort and magnify its significance. When we don’t, then the challenge was insurmountable. We see other people’s failings before we recognise our own.
We have an intrinsic understanding of the quote, “l’hypocrisie est un hommage que le vice rend à la vertu,” (hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays to virtue) and happily accept that the consequences of our actions do not meet our ideals and aspirations. At least, for now, we know the difference.
We choose comfort and convenience over pain and effort. Yet many of us choose to go camping when we have a perfectly good house; or choose to go fishing when we can buy fish at a supermarket. Yet we don’t go camping just to sleep in a tent, or go fishing just to bring dead fish home. We hate cleaning and sorting and fixing. In the absence of time constraints (real or imagined), it can be an everyday joy.
Vanity and fuzz. That is what an advertising executive sees in the consumer. The fuzz he can be sure of. The vanity needs his direction.
The play is that there is some good kit out there.
Humans are creatures of habit. And, until they see it, they won’t know they need it.
Marketing is about understanding, connecting, and storytelling. It is an activity that is deeply human. Nevertheless the marketing of actual, physical products evolved over time. Back before the stone age we had rocks: sharp rocks were good for cutting, and round rocks were good for throwing. There wasn’t really any choice. Over time we were able to create, control, and use the miracle of fire. As we progressed to wearing clothes and making tools we shielded our vulnerable bodies and explored what we understood to be a hostile but providing environment. We had choices, but not much. Just a few different ways to shelter and get food. We drew pictures. And created artefacts. We represented the world seen through our eyes. As we gathered into larger groups we socialised more, shared more, imagined more and created more. We grew crops and domesticated animals. We wrote books, and read books, and engaged in virtual worlds and abstractions. We created civilisations and hierarchies. With abundance came choice: lots of goods, plenty of choice. Some goods signified status if little else. We used steam engines and unleashed the energy from coal, created factories, explored the curious magic of electromagnetism, and industrialised the Haber-Bosch process. It became a world of plenty. We became discerning consumers in an increasingly sophisticated world. More recently we developed the computer and the internet. Here we are now, flooded with choice and opportunity. A churning, forever changing world with people nattering that stuff doesn’t last and about future-proofing. I’m no anthropologist and I am certainly no technologist, but the only thing I can think of that is future-proof - at least on a humankind timescale - is what we started with: the rock.
Breakthroughs in technology sell themselves. Some explode onto the scene, while many others permeate into general use if not public awareness. Designers and engineers work quietly in the background finding solutions that best balance function, safety, materials and production costs. Executives work out sales, marketing, logistics, investor returns, and dictate what designers and engineers are allowed to do. While this has lead to the pervasive presence of touch screens in modern cars (not good: scrolling through menus while travelling at 60km/h doesn’t make much sense) it also lead to electronic safety aids like airbags, ABS, and electric power steering (good for the millions of average drivers travelling in a big metal box at speed; not good for the car enthusiast who prefers a more direct road feel). For better or worse, technology is the physical manifestation of human progress. And progress is messy.
Many consumers - even young consumers - complain that the stuff made today is not made as well and doesn’t last as long as “vintage” stuff. I don’t know much about other stuff but I do know a bit about bicycles. Last week I worked on my brother’s bike to get it ready for sale. The bike hasn’t hit the road for well over 20 years and it was my bike before it was his. There’s a bit of surface rust but everything runs perfectly including the brakes and the 2x6 speed indexed shifters and derailleurs. This is a relic of a simpler time. This is sturdy, reliable stuff. No fancy chains, shifts ramps, cable cams or other modern refinements. Sadly, it’s also not a great ride. Then again, it's a cheap bike with an unresponsive frame and heavy wheels. It is, undoubtably, not a fast bike. The most impressive thing I discovered was the elasticity and pliability of the Continental inner tubes. These stretchy, supple butyl tubes even look good with crisp, yellow labels proudly stating the company that made them. I still use Conti inner tubes. They don’t have the same feel or appearance. Inner tubes sit under a tyre, hidden.
