Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 59
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nightofthefleming's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    607

    Alternative to 1x11; 42T cassette sprocket

    42T sprocket you can add to Shimano and Sram 10 speed cassettes. Just remove the 17T cog and add the 42T on the end. Interesting

    OneUp Components - Welcome
    2013 Medium Santa Cruz Blur Trc in Matte/Silver, full XT kit, 1x10 with 32T wolftooth ring, 25 pounds 7 ounces

  2. #2
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,000
    Seems like an incredibly bad idea, there's a very good reason that the top 3 gears on any modern cassette are on a common carrier. With 42 teeth, I'd think this would be a recipe for a destroyed cassette body and jamming/striping the splines out. That's what happened when cassettes used individual cogs for those top gears before.
    "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.

  3. #3
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,829

    Alternative to 1x11; 42T cassette sprocket

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Seems like an incredibly bad idea, there's a very good reason that the top 3 gears on any modern cassette are on a common carrier. With 42 teeth, I'd think this would be a recipe for a destroyed cassette body and jamming/striping the splines out. That's what happened when cassettes used individual cogs for those top gears before.
    It is an aluminum cog with a relatively wide base. Not going to do much to an aluminum FH body. Far less than a single steel cog.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  4. #4
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,000
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    It is an aluminum cog with a relatively wide base. Not going to do much to an aluminum FH body. Far less than a single steel cog.
    Still it's about 1/3rd the size of the carrier on a modern cassette that only has to put up with up to a 36t cog, with all that torque going to that small area. Whether it strips out the cassette body or itself, I think it's a recipe for disaster.
    "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.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,339
    I want Shimano to hurry up and give us a 11-40 10spd XT cassette, I'd sell hundreds of them.

  6. #6
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,829

    Alternative to 1x11; 42T cassette sprocket

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Still it's about 1/3rd the size of the carrier on a modern cassette that only has to put up with up to a 36t cog, with all that torque going to that small area. Whether it strips out the cassette body or itself, I think it's a recipe for disaster.
    I doubt it will be a problem. Bet this cog's spline interface is at least a wide as a typical splined crank spider.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  7. #7
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,829

    Alternative to 1x11; 42T cassette sprocket

    Quote Originally Posted by Fix the Spade View Post
    I want Shimano to hurry up and give us a 11-40 10spd XT cassette, I'd sell hundreds of them.
    Don't hold your breath.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,339
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    Don't hold your breath.
    I'm not, but it would be nice, plus it would kill XX1 and XD driver hub shells stone dead, but since when have Shimano done things that made sense...

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    753
    It wouldn't kill XX1, not even close. The 10 tooth is a big deal, it's not all about the 42. And the XD driver really is a better way to attach a cassette. Expensive, but better.

    But it would offer an alternative, where right now, XTR is pretty much dead. No one is buying them.

    -Tom

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,339
    Quote Originally Posted by trhoppe View Post
    It wouldn't kill XX1, not even close. The 10 tooth is a big deal, it's not all about the 42.-Tom
    Not to OEMs it isn't, if they could have 90% of XO1, skip the XD driver price/compatibility issue and fit wide range 1x10 to all models that would be it, XX/XO1 over and done with. Like Hammerschmidt after market wouldn't be enough to support it if the OEMs no longer wanted it.

    As it is it's marginal, some brands are fitting XO1/XX1 to high end bikes for 2014, others are sticking with ten speed or offering roughly equivalent models with one or the other to cover both bases. The XC end of the market is pretty much ignoring XX1 entirely, of my 2014 price lists only Santa Cruz are offering XX1 short travel bikes, the rest is dominated by XT/XTR/XO.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    753
    The XC end of the market ignoring XX1? Come out to a race everyone here is on XX1.

    -Tom

  12. #12
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,000
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    I doubt it will be a problem. Bet this cog's spline interface is at least a wide as a typical splined crank spider.
    Err, we have seen it. A typical splined crank spider is much deeper with the splines. Typical cassette spiders are much shallower, not to mention that a 3-gear carrier is usually wider than even the 3 gears, out to the 4th gear which doesn't have a spacer, to spread the load out even more. It's really not close to a splined crank spider.

    Maybe it works, but given how even the 3-gear splined carriers eat a little into cassette bodies, I'm not betting on it.
    "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.

  13. #13
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,998
    Quote Originally Posted by trhoppe View Post
    The XC end of the market ignoring XX1? Come out to a race everyone here is on XX1.

    -Tom


    Racers are but a small segment of the XC market, which is another small segment.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: markymark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    460
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Seems like an incredibly bad idea, there's a very good reason that the top 3 gears on any modern cassette are on a common carrier. With 42 teeth, I'd think this would be a recipe for a destroyed cassette body and jamming/striping the splines out. That's what happened when cassettes used individual cogs for those top gears before.
    i agree, there will be a ton of torque on this thing, either the driveshell goes, or this cog disintegrates pretty quickly, it's aluminium.

    Anyway what about shifting, obviously will need a long cage derailleur, but will it actually work?

    but if it does work, i'll be getting one!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Seems like an incredibly bad idea, there's a very good reason that the top 3 gears on any modern cassette are on a common carrier. With 42 teeth, I'd think this would be a recipe for a destroyed cassette body and jamming/striping the splines out. That's what happened when cassettes used individual cogs for those top gears before.
    not at all. i have been on alum. 42 cog (mirfe) for a while with zero sign of free hub body damage. before mirfe i had been using 41 steel cog from ebay for almost whole year, and even this cog put very minimal dents.
    HuRa
    architecture and interior design
    website facebook

  16. #16
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,829

    Alternative to 1x11; 42T cassette sprocket

    Quote Originally Posted by markymark View Post
    i agree, there will be a ton of torque on this thing, either the driveshell goes, or this cog disintegrates pretty quickly, it's aluminium.

    Anyway what about shifting, obviously will need a long cage derailleur, but will it actually work?

    but if it does work, i'll be getting one!
    The 42t cog on XX1 and XO1 cassettes are aluminum, as are most chainrings larger than 28t.

    Your other questions are addressed on the company website.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,153
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Still it's about 1/3rd the size of the carrier on a modern cassette that only has to put up with up to a 36t cog, with all that torque going to that small area. Whether it strips out the cassette body or itself, I think it's a recipe for disaster.
    I dont think that it is a problem at all.

    XX1 has been out for a while now - and ENTIRE carrier has a splined interface that is approx 5mm. The rest of the carrier and the freehub body have no splines at all, and there has been no reports of the doom and gloom you are claiming.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,153
    I have experienced the freehub body damage that Jayem is talking about with certain cassettes on certain freehubs. I am thinking its probably more down to manufacturing tolerances - some cassettes slide on super easy, others you have to almost tap on/press fit.

    On a hope hub I was using a shimano cassette (cant remember if it was XT or SLX) and it caused all sorts of scoring on the freehub. When it came time to replace the cassette I cleaned up the splines and then had a brand new XT as well as a brand new X0 available - initially I put the XT on, and it slid on easily - then the X0 - it was very difficult to get it on. Almost like a pressfit. And guess what, when I eventually removed that tight fitting cassette, there was no further damage to the freehub body.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: markymark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    460
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    The 42t cog on XX1 and XO1 cassettes are aluminum, as are most chainrings larger than 28t.
    .
    can't compare them, they are on a completely different driveshell, and connected to a spider. This is one huge cog made out of cheese taking a LOT of torque, don't think it will last long around the spline. The general lee, at least, has 3 cogs width on the driveshell spreading out the load.

  20. #20
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,829

    Alternative to 1x11; 42T cassette sprocket

    Quote Originally Posted by markymark View Post
    can't compare them, they are on a completely different driveshell, and connected to a spider. This is one huge cog made out of cheese taking a LOT of torque, don't think it will last long around the spline. The general lee, at least, has 3 cogs width on the driveshell spreading out the load.
    Mostly I am comparing the wear of the teeth.

    And have you seen how the XX1 cassette is attached?

    Not much spline there, and it is all on the aluminum cog.


    The threaded sleeve is the lock ring and is free spinning in the cassette. All the torque goes through the narrow aluminum splines.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  21. #21
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,000
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    Mostly I am comparing the wear of the teeth.

    And have you seen how the XX1 cassette is attached?

    Not much spline there, and it is all on the aluminum cog.
    Yes, but the cog is connected to the rest of the cassette and not free, yes? Not same thing at all.
    "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.

  22. #22
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,829

    Alternative to 1x11; 42T cassette sprocket

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Yes, but the cog is connected to the rest of the cassette and not free, yes? Not same thing at all.
    Obviously you do not know, then.

    See the edit. The rest of the cassette is connected to the large cog.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,153
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    See the edit. The rest of the cassette is connected to the large cog.
    Absolute correct. I am holding one in my hands right now looking at it and the freehub.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    628
    It's also splined at the outside edge. It's not being just driven by the largest cog. Much more surface area than the single cog.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OneUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    34
    Thanks for all the comments guys

    As was mentioned a few times above the OneUp sprocket is 4mm at the base. This is very similar to the XX1 load bearing area. We have put some hard climbing on these without marking the freehub.

    I hope this helps
    - Team OneUp

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 42t (or>36t) Cassette sprocket/adaptor for Shimano 10 speed?
    By October26 in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-04-2014, 02:22 PM
  2. Sprocket and Rear Cassette Questions
    By Smasher! in forum Urban/DJ/Park
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-10-2011, 08:45 AM
  3. Sprocket hop?
    By GoPhilly in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-05-2011, 05:57 PM
  4. CS-M760 XT cassette aq/as sprocket interchangeability
    By Goran_injo in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-09-2011, 12:24 AM
  5. 10T sprocket to make a 10x34 cassette
    By Ausable in forum Weight Weenies
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-11-2011, 08:55 AM

Posting Permissions

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