Results 1 to 58 of 58
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    16

    Single drive chain with alot of range?

    To me the new 1x11 doesn't look that good for serious hills & some comments online seem to say "your single front chainring won't get you up hills in the mountains no matter how fit you are"

    Besides I love the low range torque feel you get on 3 front chain rings, makes for a fun ride when you wan't to go hard in slow speeds.


    Why don't they make the back cogs much larger diameter?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    535
    1x11 is so 2015. Eagle!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,784
    You can get just about any low gear you want with 1x11 with appropriate selection of crank/ring and cogs. If you need more total range, 2x11 will get your there. 3x???
    Do the math.

  4. #4
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post


    Why don't they make the back cogs much larger diameter?
    That's exactly what they are doing.
    There are two types of people in this world:
    1) Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

  5. #5
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,191
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post
    Why don't they make the back cogs much larger diameter?
    um... they do.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    894
    On the cheap, sunrace 11-50 cassette with a 30t or 28t chainring.

  7. #7
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,343
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post
    & some comments online seem to say "your single front chainring won't get you up hills in the mountains no matter how fit you are"
    Which is complete BS.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  8. #8
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    On the cheap, sunrace 11-50 cassette with a 30t or 28t chainring.
    ^ this right here.
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  9. #9
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,634
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post
    To me the new 1x11 doesn't look that good for serious hills & some comments online seem to say "your single front chainring won't get you up hills in the mountains no matter how fit you are"
    This is just plain wrong. Never going to handicap myself again with a FD, and I'm old, ride mountains, and am quite lazy. 1X got me up 80 km of vert last year
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  10. #10
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Bickle View Post
    This is just plain wrong. Never going to handicap myself again with a FD, and I'm old, ride mountains, and am quite lazy. 1X got me up 80 km of vert last year
    LOL, right on, Travis. I'm 63 and 1x42 (29" wheel) was low enough for me to gain 370k in '16. Uh yeah, as a matter of fact I do employ a 28t chainring.
    =s
    P.S. Not all the ideas in your head are bad.
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    359
    I'm hardly fit but I can climb anything a 2x or 3x can on my 32x11-42.

    Only thing I miss from 2x was being able to fit a 34t so that I could move a bit faster when I need it.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ARandomBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,000
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post
    To me the new 1x11 doesn't look that good for serious hills & some comments online seem to say "your single front chainring won't get you up hills in the mountains no matter how fit you are"

    Besides I love the low range torque feel you get on 3 front chain rings, makes for a fun ride when you wan't to go hard in slow speeds.


    Why don't they make the back cogs much larger diameter?
    Today I learned that a 50T back cog isn't "larger diameter".

    I used to think I needed a 30x42 granny gear, then after single speeding on a 32x20 for the past 2 years exclusively I realized that 32x36 granny is plenty sufficient. At gearing below that, it's faster and easier to just freaking walk.

    Velominati Rule #5.
    Don’t modify the trail to match your skills, modify your skills to match the trails.

  13. #13
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    517
    I just made the switch to eagle and sized up to 34t chainring to get more high end gearing, still enough low end with the 50 cog. I don't think I could live with 28/30t X 11, don't you spin out on fast descents??

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ARandomBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,000
    if I can spin out a 30x11 for more than like 100 yds, the trail is probably too boring to ride.
    Less than 100 yds and it's just a transition between the good stuff.
    Don’t modify the trail to match your skills, modify your skills to match the trails.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    427
    I did a race in MN a few weeks ago and it was interesting to see all the eagle drive trains the were never in use in the 50t cog. It was in MN so that is part of it but even on the steeper hills I would follow riders that were in the 3rd or 4th cog. One section I actually was walking cause I am fat and I was tired and a guy came up to the bottom of the climb and when I stopped to let him by he want past at less than walking pace and he was in the 3rd cog cause I looked. Those big gold diner plates make it easy to spot. It was just a very interesting observation that I never saw someone in the 50t cog on any of the climbs.

  16. #16
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    517
    I'm in it a fair bit but I live in the mtns, plus a 34t ring. I could see using the stock 32t for some big climbing days too

    **Also to the OP if you do the math the gear ratios on the high and low end(34x10 and 34x50)are very close to my previous 2X setup which was 24/38x11/36 cog

  17. #17
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,873
    My feeling is that anything larger than a 42t in the rear is really just a pure bailout gear. Been riding 32tx11-40 for close to two years now in everything from the Tahoe/NorCal/NorNV high desert to Sedona and Steamboat Springs and never had a problem with the setup.

    People who are saying that "your single front chainring won't get you up hills in the mountains no matter how fit you are" are completely full of ISHT or pure downhill monkeys that would rather shuttle than have to pedal up small mound of dirt.

  18. #18
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    517
    It allows you to run a bigger ring up front tho for more high end gearing, if that's something you want

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    359
    Quote Originally Posted by Jefflinde View Post
    I did a race in MN a few weeks ago and it was interesting to see all the eagle drive trains the were never in use in the 50t cog. It was in MN so that is part of it but even on the steeper hills I would follow riders that were in the 3rd or 4th cog. One section I actually was walking cause I am fat and I was tired and a guy came up to the bottom of the climb and when I stopped to let him by he want past at less than walking pace and he was in the 3rd cog cause I looked. Those big gold diner plates make it easy to spot. It was just a very interesting observation that I never saw someone in the 50t cog on any of the climbs.
    I would love a 50t cog if I had at least a 38t front chainring. But my bike only has clearance for 32t which is what a lot of these eagle users are probably running. 32x50t or 30x50t would spin so quickly with so little torque while moving the bike so slowly it would be hard to pedal fast enough to stay balanced or at any semblance of a good pace.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bigjunk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post
    To me the new 1x11 doesn't look that good for serious hills & some comments online seem to say "your single front chainring won't get you up hills in the mountains no matter how fit you are"

    Besides I love the low range torque feel you get on 3 front chain rings, makes for a fun ride when you wan't to go hard in slow speeds.


    Why don't they make the back cogs much larger diameter?
    Do you actually expect guys who spent a lot of money on their bike to have the newest 1x awesomeness to admit their bike is not as capable as before? Do some research before jumping on 1x.

    If you are a professional racer and your particular race can be completed with 1x then it makes since, this is 1x's purpose. If you are riding many trails and conditions like everyone else then gears are needed. Even the pros who run certain races with 1x are all fairly consistent in that they only use 1x for certain places and races, not when they get home. They go home and get on their 2-3x bike for all other riding.
    Some guys will stick huge rings on the back cassette because the are set on using 1x no matter how ridiculously large of jumps in gear and heavy it becomes, and forget any high end speed. If you are not a professional racing a shortish / flatish race save yourself some headache and get some gears.
    As I said, 1x has it's place but it is not for everyday riding like many force it into.

  21. #21
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    517
    My 1X setup has the same high/low end gearing as my 2X had, so it is just as capable minus some overlap.

    low end gearing
    34x50=.68
    24x36=.67

    high end gearing
    34x10=3.4
    38x11=3.45

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    855
    32x50t or 30x50t would spin so quickly with so little torque while moving the bike so slowly it would be hard to pedal fast enough to stay balanced or at any semblance of a good pace.
    30*50 is 17.4 gear inches.

    I run a 22*42 small gear (15.2 gear inches, or 26*50) and use it often in the mountains. It can be used to cover sheer incline or more usually to obtain a tech clearing acceleration burst during a situation where you are already maxed out. I probably use it most often to recover between features as you can keep upright while still recovering. Using a higher spin through climbing tech allows more opportunity for adjustment, and part of the skill is modulating that torque, the key being that the torque is available to take advantage of the small windows of traction. IOW to me it works better to have a faster spin where you are always close to a power stroke and learn to modulate it then to push a higher gear and get stuck out of power or being unable to apply the proper body english because of how you need to load the pedals. While I have seen people stand up and power through some steep tech, its hard for them to keep it up over the long term of the ride or even through continuously featured steep sections and its also much less effective in the wet or when traction is especially weak.

    I read that a lot that low gearing isn't useful. Sharing my alternate opinion, also why I'm still an advocate of 2* systems. But then again, most people probably prefer to walk anyway.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    65
    22*42 😂😂....
    Get fit and ride 1x 11v. More than enough, cleaner lighter easier.

    Envoyé de mon E5823 en utilisant Tapatalk

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    855
    If you ever make it to Washington state, look me up and we can go for a ride.

  25. #25
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    ... Do some research before jumping on 1x. ...
    This is good advice. But from here on, without intending to be disagreeable, I must disagree with some of your advice, Bigjunk1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    ...
    If you are a professional racer ...
    I'm not a professional racer but I do run 1x drivetrains and my fervent desire is to never have to put up with miserable front shifting again. Never. Ever. I'm speaking for myself here. Please feel free to run whatever you like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    ... If you are riding many trails and conditions like everyone else then gears are needed. ...
    Ahem. 1x drivetrains are indeed gears, my friend. They are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    ... They go home and get on their 2-3x bike for all other riding. ...
    Now why would they do that when 1x drivetrains offer the range and trouble free shifting that so many riders prefer? And if I may ask, how do you know what professional racers do when they get home?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    ... because the are set on using 1x no matter how ridiculously large of jumps in gear and heavy it becomes ...
    I doubt I'm set on using 1x setups any more than you are set on using a multi-ring setup. Which may be a lot. And why shouldn't I be? I detect a condescending note to your reply that implies users of 1x systems are embracing them despite implied drawbacks. I don't think that implication needs to be there in your post. I haven't suffered any deficiencies in my 1x drivetrains except for a minor loss of top speed. Only place this has exposed itself is on flat or slightly descending pavement -- not a condition I ride much. I'll cheerfully accept this minor drawback in exchange for the loss of complexity in a multi-ring setup. As for weight, check the weight of both systems, you might be surprised.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    ... If you are not a professional racing a shortish / flatish race save yourself some headache and get some gears. ...
    As I mentioned I'm not a professional racer. I'm 63 y/o who's been riding off-road since '85 and used every kind of drivetrain to come along (including a decade of dedicated singlespeeding). At one time I even tried a Mountain Tamer Quad that gave me 4 chainrings (yeah, that happened). I live in the land of real mountains. Last year I utilized my 1x-equipped bikes to gain 370,000' of elevation without suffering any gearing headaches. No chainsuck. No cross-chaining. No pesky shift lever where my dropper lever ought to be. Yes, I'm in love with the 1x drivetrain compared to everything else available today.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    ... As I said, 1x has it's place but it is not for everyday riding like many force it into.
    Really? I don't force my 1x drivetrains into anything. I enjoy them. And I hope you enjoy your 3x or 2x or whatever you choose to ride. That's your choice and I'm sure you'll use whatever serves you best. Multi-ring drivetrains aren't for me, in fact I disdain them but you won't find me telling you they're wrong for you. Please don't imply that 1x setups are wrong for others. They may be the best thing yet for some of us. Thanks again, my friend.
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Preston67 View Post
    If you ever make it to Washington state, look me up and we can go for a ride.
    Unfortunately I'm in France
    But I ride the alps up and down.
    When I was on 2x my biggest gear was 24x34 with a 15kg bike and I wasn't fit at all. And that was enough for me to climb everything during many hours. Up to 2500m pass !

    I got the equivalent gear with 32x46 with 1x on my 29" but 12kg bike. Better fitness but no pro and I climb everything literally everything. From steep and technical to long fireroad at 15%

    The previous message says it all !
    11x with 10-46 cassette covers everything for low fit dude.

    My 2x was always bugged. I had plenty of issue. When I saw 1x become a thing I cried of joy

    Envoyé de mon E5823 en utilisant Tapatalk

  27. #27
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,634
    The internet is the only place front derailleurs are popular
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  28. #28
    RAKC Industries
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,030
    1x is for everyday riding in my case.

    Fat bike is 26t with 11-42 10 speed, 4.7 tires

    Road bike is 40t with 11-40 11 speed

    B+ bike is 28t with 11-46 11 speed, 3.0 tires. This will probably see a 30t here soonish.

    I could see range not being enough in the mountains for some. But my fat bike is low enough I haven't found anything I can't spin up yet. My plus bike seems to be almost the exact same gear inches, but not the rotating mass so I don't hit the 46 very often now that trails have been open and got some decent miles in.

    Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
    Life on a bike doesn't begin till the sun goes down.

    US partner for Ravemen:
    www.rakclighting.com

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSU Alum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,343
    I turn 65 in August....my trails all start at 6500 feet....I only ride 1x11 ( or maybe 12 at some point.

  30. #30
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    At one time I even tried a Mountain Tamer Quad that gave me 4 chainrings (yeah, that happened).
    Whoa, never seen that! How did you shift it, with a friction shifter? How long did you run that?
    There are two types of people in this world:
    1) Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ARandomBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Bickle View Post
    The internet is the only place front derailleurs are popular
    While I get the thrust behind your humor, I think you actually have it backwards. 90% of the bikes I see on the trails are 2x or 3x. 2 years ago, when I still had gears on my bike, I had a 32x42 1x conversion and got questions about it all the time.
    Don’t modify the trail to match your skills, modify your skills to match the trails.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bigjunk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1
    ... Do some research before jumping on 1x. ...
    This is good advice. But from here on, without intending to be disagreeable, I must disagree with some of your advice, Bigjunk1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1
    ...
    If you are a professional racer ...
    I'm not a professional racer but I do run 1x drivetrains and my fervent desire is to never have to put up with miserable front shifting again. Never. Ever. I'm speaking for myself here. Please feel free to run whatever you like.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1
    ... If you are riding many trails and conditions like everyone else then gears are needed. ...
    Ahem. 1x drivetrains are indeed gears, my friend. They are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1
    ... They go home and get on their 2-3x bike for all other riding. ...
    Now why would they do that when 1x drivetrains offer the range and trouble free shifting that so many riders prefer? And if I may ask, how do you know what professional racers do when they get home?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1
    ... because the are set on using 1x no matter how ridiculously large of jumps in gear and heavy it becomes ...
    I doubt I'm set on using 1x setups any more than you are set on using a multi-ring setup. Which may be a lot. And why shouldn't I be? I detect a condescending note to your reply that implies users of 1x systems are embracing them despite implied drawbacks. I don't think that implication needs to be there in your post. I haven't suffered any deficiencies in my 1x drivetrains except for a minor loss of top speed. Only place this has exposed itself is on flat or slightly descending pavement -- not a condition I ride much. I'll cheerfully accept this minor drawback in exchange for the loss of complexity in a multi-ring setup. As for weight, check the weight of both systems, you might be surprised.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1
    ... If you are not a professional racing a shortish / flatish race save yourself some headache and get some gears. ...
    As I mentioned I'm not a professional racer. I'm 63 y/o who's been riding off-road since '85 and used every kind of drivetrain to come along (including a decade of dedicated singlespeeding). At one time I even tried a Mountain Tamer Quad that gave me 4 chainrings (yeah, that happened). I live in the land of real mountains. Last year I utilized my 1x-equipped bikes to gain 370,000' of elevation without suffering any gearing headaches. No chainsuck. No cross-chaining. No pesky shift lever where my dropper lever ought to be. Yes, I'm in love with the 1x drivetrain compared to everything else available today.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1
    ... As I said, 1x has it's place but it is not for everyday riding like many force it into.
    Really? I don't force my 1x drivetrains into anything. I enjoy them. And I hope you enjoy your 3x or 2x or whatever you choose to ride. That's your choice and I'm sure you'll use whatever serves you best. Multi-ring drivetrains aren't for me, in fact I disdain them but you won't find me telling you they're wrong for you. Please don't imply that 1x setups are wrong for others. They may be the best thing yet for some of us. Thanks again, my friend.

    I like my 3x = 22-32-44 x 11-36 cassette. I am not typical as I like riding the road a lot as well with the same bike I race with. Even with the range I have I use every gear low to high and it barely is enough for most of where I ride.
    My front shifts smooth every time and I have become very good at up or down shifting the rear in conjunction with the front to end up in the gear I want. I think many guys have trouble with shifting into the correct gear when changing rings (understandable) and that is why they want 1x.
    I love the idea of 1x but it has a lot of room for improvement to be truly an acceptable substitute for the range and jumps 2-3x can provide. I would like to see the DI2 shift through gears and automatically skip the gears that are identical for both front rings and be controlled with one shifter, similar to a vehicles automatic transmission. I can see this or a similar system as the future and being electronic it seems possible and the way shifting should be. 1x could also have it's future if something can be made to give the same range and gearing jumps to match what front rings provide but the chain twist seems to be an issue in making a wider cassette. A chainring that swivels possibly could allow a wider cassette?
    I do see 1x as something many push for despite it's drawbacks and need for improvement. Many people force 1x just for the sake of having 1x even though it will not work well for their riding. Without the negatives being exposed someone can not make an educated decision on what to use. Many with 1x want to justify their decision and purchase even if they later realize it was not a good one for them.
    I like how you can give your opinion and totally disagree with mine like a gentleman. Thanks for arguing in a civilized manner, not always common around here.

  33. #33
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Whoa, never seen that! How did you shift it, with a friction shifter? How long did you run that?
    Yeah, this was way back in the day of friction shifters. The Quad allowed for front chainrings as small as 17t. Evidently it's still available. Front shifting sucks in general IMO and the Quad required a front derailleur with adequate range to swing across four chainrings -- mine didn't. I ditched it in favor of Avid's Microadaptor when that product debuted not long after the Quad. IIRC my Microadaptor was outfitted with a 20t chainring.

    I'm so grateful for single ring drivetrains with wide range clusters. I find it funny whenever anyone suggests that the larger gaps between gears makes them untenable. I don't notice any problem whatsoever. In fact, even with my 11-46t cassettes, I find myself shifting two gears at a time more often than not, whether upshifting or downshifting.

    With a 28t chainring and 11-42t or 11-46t cassette (have both), I climb sustained grades as steep as 22%.
    =s
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  34. #34
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    517
    The rear shifting on the eagle cassette feels exactly like my 2X setup with 11/36 cass, except the jump to the 50 which I can notice but usually moving slow so the shift would be slower and less precise. I don't think this is a viable knock on it tho.

    To be fair my 2X setups shifted fine up front, I still have a hardtail with a 2X and it shifts nice but the 1X is simpler, lighter and now has the same range soooo, also having a single ring up front does allow mfg's more freedom with their designs not to mention bigger rubber in the back

  35. #35
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,634
    I only see front derailleurs on older, or low end bikes nowadays.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Weinerts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    307
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Bickle View Post
    The internet is the only place front derailleurs are popular
    I like mine - I have a fat bike and and ride a 2 X 9 with 12 - 41 in the back (home made)setup with large cog from ebay (santee California).

    I ride most of the time with the 32 - but when I am climbing on the fat bike - that low gear makes for the ability to pull up anything (22 X 41).


    I also ride a 1992 Fisher and it has 3 X 7 awesomeness. 46/36/26 12-30 in the back.
    Nice.
    My bike is heavier than yours - it does not have Carbon or Titanium parts - I love it!

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone Rager View Post
    You can get just about any low gear you want with 1x11 with appropriate selection of crank/ring and cogs. If you need more total range, 2x11 will get your there. 3x???
    This thread shows what an utter noob I'am.

    Although I have read about the pros & cons of 2 vs 1 front chain ring. I still can't really decide. To me single front chain ring stands out when pedaling while standing up.

  38. #38
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post
    This thread shows what an utter noob I'am.

    Although I have read about the pros & cons of 2 vs 1 front chain ring. I still can't really decide. To me single front chain ring stands out when pedaling while standing up.
    May I ask what makes you say this? Considering that 1x and 2x drivetrains can provide a similar gear range, I don't understand why one would would be superior to the other for pedaling while standing. Please explain. Thanks.
    =s
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bigjunk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    260
    My 30 speed 22-32-44 with 11-36 cassette has about 24 different gears when you take away the mirrored gears of front rings. Guys keep claiming that 1x has the same range but it simply does not and to accomplish it the jumps between gears would be so large they would be fairly useless. Do the math.
    Someone could stick a rear cassette with a 60 tooth big ring and a 2 tooth small ring and get close in range depending on their front ring but the cadence jumps between the lowest and highest gears is to wide to be usable.
    Giving up the high end gears and having larger jumps in the low end is not a perfect solution but can be good for certain trails that don't require the gearing.
    Ix is a great concept but it has a lot of room for improvement to truly be considered an upgrade and be acceptable over all terrain.

  40. #40
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,343
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    My 30 speed 22-32-44 with 11-36 cassette has about 24 different gears when you take away the mirrored gears of front rings. Guys keep claiming that 1x has the same range but it simply does not and to accomplish it the jumps between gears would be so large they would be fairly useless. Do the math.
    Someone could stick a rear cassette with a 60 tooth big ring and a 2 tooth small ring and get close in range depending on their front ring but the cadence jumps between the lowest and highest gears is to wide to be usable.
    Giving up the high end gears and having larger jumps in the low end is not a perfect solution but can be good for certain trails that don't require the gearing.
    Ix is a great concept but it has a lot of room for improvement to truly be considered an upgrade and be acceptable over all terrain.
    Yeah, I remember a couple years ago when we rode 22-32-44 x 11-32 and we couldn't climb anything. It was crazy, we would come up to hills and just stop.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ARandomBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,000
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    My 30 speed 22-32-44 with 11-36 cassette has about 24 different gears when you take away the mirrored gears of front rings. Guys keep claiming that 1x has the same range but it simply does not and to accomplish it the jumps between gears would be so large they would be fairly useless. Do the math.
    Someone could stick a rear cassette with a 60 tooth big ring and a 2 tooth small ring and get close in range depending on their front ring but the cadence jumps between the lowest and highest gears is to wide to be usable.
    Giving up the high end gears and having larger jumps in the low end is not a perfect solution but can be good for certain trails that don't require the gearing.
    Ix is a great concept but it has a lot of room for improvement to truly be considered an upgrade and be acceptable over all terrain.
    Name:  IMG_0428.JPG
Views: 553
Size:  45.3 KB

    I'm not overly attached to a certain cadence or effort. 'Close' is close enough. I've found 1x11 to be pretty damned awesome.
    Don’t modify the trail to match your skills, modify your skills to match the trails.

  42. #42
    connisseur
    Reputation: Tickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    517
    Maybe he's just retro? Susp, disc brakes, tubeless tires, dropper posts all just gimmicks not usable for everyday riding!

    I'm ready for no rear der either bring it on

  43. #43
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Tickle View Post

    I'm ready for no rear der either bring it on
    I'm sure you know there are those of us who indeed ride without a rear der.
    There are two types of people in this world:
    1) Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    107
    I'm rocking a 3X10. I'd love to try 1X, but I'm afraid if I touch my front derailleur and mess around with it and DON'T love it I'll be pissing around with it trying to get everything to shift as well as it does right now. Also, pulling off XTR bits to toss them in the bin feels wrong.

    If I break something, it's gone.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    May I ask what makes you say this? Considering that 1x and 2x drivetrains can provide a similar gear range, I don't understand why one would would be superior to the other for pedaling while standing. Please explain. Thanks.
    =s
    I thought that just one chain ring would be more solid & less prone to chain coming off, noise & crappy alignment. Well I noticed on some cheaper bikes with 3 chainrings after a while standing & pedaling just feels crap & I'm worried something will snap.

  46. #46
    meatier showers
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    7,986
    Quote Originally Posted by propelos View Post
    I thought that just one chain ring would be more solid & less prone to chain coming off, noise & crappy alignment. Well I noticed on some cheaper bikes with 3 chainrings after a while standing & pedaling just feels crap & I'm worried something will snap.
    Given quality equipment and proper setup, neither system has an advantage over the other for standing while pedaling.
    =s
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    Given quality equipment and proper setup, neither system has an advantage over the other for standing while pedaling.
    =s
    Accurate.

    New riders may be having issues with appropriate chainlines if they feel like the system is under stress while standing and hammering, but other than that, a well adjusted system works. Getting it well adjusted and shifting perfectly is the battle.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by MasterBaker View Post
    I'm rocking a 3X10. I'd love to try 1X, but I'm afraid if I touch my front derailleur and mess around with it and DON'T love it I'll be pissing around with it trying to get everything to shift as well as it does right now. Also, pulling off XTR bits to toss them in the bin feels wrong.

    If I break something, it's gone.
    I should have knocked on wood... Now enjoying a 1X10 with a Raceface 30T narrow wide and Sunrace 11-42 10 speed.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    111
    I was a bit worried about moving from my 3x9 to a 1x12 GX Eagle. The new bike I was looking at had an option of 2x10 or 1x12 so I had to decide. However when I did the math the range wasn't as different as I thought. You just have a bigger jump between each gear.

    The image on the top is the GX eagle. The one on the bottom is my stock 3x9 from my old bike.
    Name:  1x12.PNG
Views: 381
Size:  13.7 KB

    Name:  3x10.PNG
Views: 377
Size:  15.0 KB

    You can see that on the high end I lose the top two gears. Not a big deal as I almost never use them.
    On the low end I am actually 0.01 lower than my 3x9 system. So climbing should technically be easier, but I doubt I would notice a difference.
    In the few weeks since I've had the bike I can't say that I have come across a case where I wished I had more range. The low is the same to what I've been riding the past 6 years, and I never used the high end.
    Last edited by offroadcmpr; 09-26-2017 at 09:28 AM. Reason: formatting

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,749
    My Santa Cruz highball used to have a 3x9. It worked really well, but I wanted to save weight and looked closely at 1x systems as well as riding my 3x9 and limiting my gearing to various set ups just to see how it worked. 1x10 with a 36t rear did not give me enough range. 1x11 systems did give range. However the 10-42 provided the best range on top and bottom end. I went for a 28t chainring and with 42t in the back I right at the same low end as the Offroadcmpr's eagle. 28x42 = 32x50 = 22x34. So good on the low end. On the top end 28x10 is solid, but where I give up range. 28x10 is in fact much better than 28x11. It is only 1 tooth, but with the smaller cogs the 1 tooth change is more important to ratio. On the top end I did a number of rides to see how it worked out and I could live with a 28x10 or 3.09 ratio. If I have a very flat spinny race I can always swap chainrings. 24hrs of old Pueblo course is one where I might swap out the 28t for 32t or 34t because I know I don't need the low end and do have 3 min long 22mph downhill dirt road section on the course.

    Now why not go with eagle? Weight. 10-42 cassette in XX1 guise is very light especially for a big cassette. The Shimano 11-46 is rather heavy. Even the new eagle 10-50 has great range, but is heavy. Plus being new is costly. So I chose to go 11spd and so far it works out well.

    no factory 1x11 has the range of a 3x9 system, but these 1x systems do work well. You just have to realize that you will be giving up some range at top end or bottom end or both to when you change. You need to look closely at your riding to really see where you want to compromise and you can have 2 chainings if you like.

    BTW... On my Santa Cruz 5010 I have a dual 1x10. 11-36 cassette with a 32t chainring, but also a 26t chainring. Why? For me on that bike 32x36 is not low enough. The previous owner set it up 1x10, but that low end was too much work for what I wanted. My HT bikes are for charging hard up hills. This bike is to get up hills so I can push the descents. I went 2x10 for a while, but in an effort to save weight started looking at 1x. I did not want to spend the money on a full 1x system with a 10-42. This is my spare bike so when I spent the $$$ on the hardtail I did not want to for this bike. So after running numbers I realized that I needed to put a 26t on the 64 BCD anyway due to size so I could put the 32t narrow wide I had when I got the bike on the 104 BCD and shift manually. Long steep climb.. move the chain by hand to 26t and have 26x36 on 27.5 wheels. The 26x11 will spin out so then use the 32t.

    This has worked really well given how I use the bike. I did an enduro with it last weekend and had 7 mile 2000 foot climb transit section. So I went to my 26t and climbed up taking it easy. For the timed stages I moved to the 32t chain ring and was off. It takes 30 seconds to swap over. I would not want this on my HT XC bikes because it does distrub the flow of riding if I have to stop, but for 5" FS bike.... it works well since I ride the bike differently.
    Joe
    '12 Santa Cruz Highball 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5",Vassago Verhauen SS 29" XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,106
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Bickle View Post
    The internet is the only place front derailleurs are popular
    Unless you are bikepacking with a full load and like a full range of closer gears, YRMV. Love the 1x11 on my fatty.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,749
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Unless you are bikepacking with a full load and like a full range of closer gears, YRMV. Love the 1x11 on my fatty.
    Have bikepacked in colorado in with my 28t 10-42. Worked fine even climbing to 12k feet. Only on 1 steep paved road climb did I need more low end than the 28x42. On the top end.. well bike packing is not about top end speed so it work. I have friend who did the 550+ mile Colorado trail race with 26t and 10speed 11-42 cassette. Yeah 26x11 is low, but when bikepacking going that fast is all about conserving energy. So just let it coast if you are going 20 mph.
    Joe
    '12 Santa Cruz Highball 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5",Vassago Verhauen SS 29" XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ethierjung's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    47
    I have the Eagle in 32x50 and I have climbed every mountain in Louisiana......
    2015 Scalpel Carbon Team/Eagle 1x12
    2015 Scalpel Carbon Team #2
    2017 Stache 7
    2016 Boone RSL
    2016 CAAD 12

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MikeDee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,625
    Quote Originally Posted by offroadcmpr View Post
    I was a bit worried about moving from my 3x9 to a 1x12 GX Eagle. The new bike I was looking at had an option of 2x10 or 1x12 so I had to decide. However when I did the math the range wasn't as different as I thought. You just have a bigger jump between each gear.

    The image on the top is the GX eagle. The one on the bottom is my stock 3x9 from my old bike.
    Name:  1x12.PNG
Views: 381
Size:  13.7 KB

    Name:  3x10.PNG
Views: 377
Size:  15.0 KB

    You can see that on the high end I lose the top two gears. Not a big deal as I almost never use them.
    On the low end I am actually 0.01 lower than my 3x9 system. So climbing should technically be easier, but I doubt I would notice a difference.
    In the few weeks since I've had the bike I can't say that I have come across a case where I wished I had more range. The low is the same to what I've been riding the past 6 years, and I never used the high end.
    If you are calculating gear ratios, then your math is off. A 32/32 has a gear ratio of 1.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MikeDee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,625

    Single drive chain with alot of range?

    Jenson USA has an Eagle cassette for $367. Forget 1X for me.

    I think 10 tooth cogs are impractical. Too much chordial action. I wonder how easy it is to bend that 50 tooth cog?
    Last edited by MikeDee; 4 Weeks Ago at 08:31 AM.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    111
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeDee View Post
    If you are calculating gear ratios, then your math is off. A 32/32 has a gear ratio of 1.
    I was using this website to do the calculations.
    Looks like hidden in their menu they reveal that they are auto adjusting the ratios so that you can compare the effective gear ratio across different wheel sizes. I had it set to use a 29 with a 2.4 tire on it, and it was adjusting the ratio what that would feel like on a 26 in wheel.
    Both screenshots used this setting, so the difference between my 3x9 and 1x12 is still the same, but the values in the screenshot would be off.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    253
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Yeah, I remember a couple years ago when we rode 22-32-44 x 11-32 and we couldn't climb anything. It was crazy, we would come up to hills and just stop.
    Now this, gosh darn it, is funny. HAHAHAHHAHAHA

    I am firmly in the 2x camp, 26x34 front, 11-40 rear) and I really like the total range, and the gap between gears.

    But I will also admit that I do not shift the front derailleur very often. Typically, when I am on hilly single track, 'mountainous' terrain, etc., I am always in the small ring and just shift the rear.

    Then, when I am on the fire road section of the ride, I use the big ring and just shift the rear. (unless huge hill is looming and 25 lbs of crap strapped to the bike)

    This makes me feel Like I have two distinct 'ranges' of gearing available, but truthfully, there is overlap between the two, of course.

    The difference in the gaps between a 10-speed 11-40 and a 12-speed 11-50 is something I could probably learn to deal with.

    I question whether there will be much available with 2x in awhile. There are some Scott full-suspensions that have it available, as well as some Niner and SantaCruz models. More and more it seems to be relegated to lower-end stuff.
    2015 Salsa ElMariachi
    2017 Salsa Cutthroat

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slimphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    587
    11-42 w/ 32t oval up front. If I can't get up the hill, I'll try again another day after I train a bit more.

    If race course is generally flat I'll throw a 34t up front. If I'm doing an all day marathon ride/race I'll put a 30t (but that's only happened twice in a the last few years).

    32t oval is all I need

Similar Threads

  1. having fun riding alot....
    By singlesprocket in forum Eastern Canada
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-07-2011, 09:53 AM
  2. Thanks alot Dave Ramsey...
    By cru_jones in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-21-2011, 09:30 AM
  3. Was there alot of rain in Santa Cruz yesterday?
    By MTBAlex in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-08-2011, 02:20 PM
  4. getting back into it after 10yrs, alot has changed.
    By dieselfuel in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-13-2011, 02:54 AM
  5. 29er tube with alot of threads ?
    By Joe V in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-28-2011, 05:35 PM

Members who have read this thread: 182

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •