2012 SRAM Red Pricing, Weights Leaked?

2012 SRAM Red pricing and component weights leaked

Thanks to a reader calling himself (herself?) gfoto, we’ve got had a screen grab from an online retailer showing individual component weights for the 2012/2013 SRAM Red group along with a package price a little south of $2,500.

UPDATED: Had to pull the image and some of the exact numbers…some things just aren’t meant to be seen yet. Patience, friends.

If the numbers we saw prove to be true when the group is officially unveiled in a couple weeks, it’ll bear out rumors we’ve heard that weight continues to drop and pricing will be a bit more than the current Red group, which would be expected anyway. With not all of the parts in the group weighing in 2012/2013 form, the total group weight is somewhere around an astonishingly low 1,850g. Keep in mind, this is only for the standard, cable-actuated brakes. Whether a disc or hydraulic brake is offered at the initial launch is still anyone’s guess.

One thing to note, the Front Derailleur and Bottom Bracket numbers we’ve seen were current model year, not the YAW FD seen in image teasers already released. So, the new group could be even lighter than anticipated.

Another reader recently sent in some individual prices found on Downeast Cycling, which was yanked…but not before someone on Weight Weenies managed to pull the ol’ copy-and-paste trick.

Comments

12 thoughts on “2012 SRAM Red Pricing, Weights Leaked?

  1. Curious that the product codes are changing. Brakes have been labeled BR in the past, not BS. Rear derailleurs RD not DR. Cables CA not CB. Levers LD not SL.

    Of course, those codes aren’t what SRAM uses as their part numbers, rather what distributors use.

  2. I thought this site was BikeRUMOR – y’know with the scoop and all the leaked info, not BikePressRelease where only confirmed and authorized material is published. Take a page from other “rumor” sites and start posting the RUMORS not just what your site advertisers want to you.

  3. I agree with Stafford G on this one. Poor form for retracting something that might not actually happen. It’s a rumor for a reason.

  4. Yep, we know, we’re in the rumor business. And it pains us to have to pull info, but we’ve only ever done it a handful of times in 3-1/2 years of stories. Unfortunately, we do occasionally have to weigh breaking news with keeping our access to that information open.

    Oh the stories we could tell you…

  5. @notapro – if you want to be a better rider, quite fucking reading shit online and get on your bike! The posts here aren’t suppose to make you a better rider, they are supposed to keep you informed on the latest tech and gear.

  6. @speedy- lighten up Francis — i was on my bike on a break when i typed out. I also said thanks to bikerumor cuz i love gear just like everyone else. jeezuz what are you doing slowing down to read my crap for anyway “speedy”?

  7. Haha. I love how all of these kinds of blogs start out with the intention of being all internet wild, wild west, anything goes, but eventually cave in to the pressures of manufacturers. It’s happened to all the car blogs too.

    Now this site is basically another version of Velo News.

Leave a Reply