Results 1 to 84 of 84
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robncircus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    464

    1X people what are your ratios

    I figured we're all in So Cal and probably all climb quite a bit. What ratios are you running? I'll start - Pivot Mach 5.7 carbon with a 1X11 32 front 42 rear. Debating going to a 30 or 28 up front.. What's your ratio?

    Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    490
    I'm going to 1x on my XC bike (that will weigh about 6 pounds less than current bike), so I am going to go 32t on front, with 11-42. Will be a little tougher on the climbs but thats okay, I need to get stronger.

    I use this for ratios: BikeCalc.com - Bicycle Gear Inches Chart

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 11053's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,175
    Nomad C -32/36
    Tallboy LT C -34/42
    Rigid SS 29er 32/20

    When it gets steep and cadence slows, I stand on all bikes.
    The 34/42 allows for casual spin on most soil types until it gets really steep.

  4. #4
    Binned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,856
    I'm a 2X guy so my reply is irrelevant.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robncircus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    464
    To be honest this thread was promoted by the misery of climbing to the suicide trail in agoura. We took a trail from king James road that laid me out and made me rethink ratios. Thanks for the responses thus far.

    Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Binned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,856
    Quote Originally Posted by robncircus View Post
    To be honest this thread was promoted by the misery of climbing to the suicide trail in agoura. We took a trail from king James road that laid me out and made me rethink ratios. Thanks for the responses thus far.

    Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk
    What's the degree and distance of that particular climb?

  7. #7
    _CJ
    _CJ is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    722
    Not Cali (Colorado), but I've been running a 32 front with 11-32 rear 1x8 setup for years. About 26 gear inches with the 26" tire. Can't imagine needing or wanting a 42 rear?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robncircus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    464

    Re: 1X people what are your ratios

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawg View Post
    What's the degree and distance of that particular climb?
    we did 2 loops. 11.5 total miles and 2600 ft of climbing. here's a link. it's the first time I've walked, but man was I wiped that day.


    Check out my 11.5 mi Ride on Strava: http://app.strava.com/activities/153487764

    Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Another Colorado boy (old man) here. My low is 26x42 on my TBLTc. Gravity is my high gear.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    68
    San Diego local....34 x 11-36

  11. #11
    Binned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,856
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwivelo55 View Post
    San Diego local....34 x 11-36
    You climb Noble in that ratio?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    68
    Work in progress

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawg View Post
    You climb Noble in that ratio?

  13. #13
    Certifiably Crazy
    Reputation: Carloswithac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    442
    On the fs I run a Raceface n/w 32 ring with an 11-36 10 speed cassette.
    Hardtail runs a 32 and 11-34 9 speed cassette.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawg View Post
    You climb Noble in that ratio?
    I've climbed Noble with 32/34 it's doable. Just upgraded to 10 speed and the 36 cog should make it a bit easier. =)
    2013 Felt Edict Nine

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    129
    32/11-36

    Ride all over. No issues. Seems to be the sweet spot for me.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    691

    1X people what are your ratios

    28x42 on a Ripley. Haven't yet found myself wanting a bigger ring up front.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,609
    29er HT: 1x10, 30T front and 11-42/OneUp 42T rear

    26 FS: 1x9 30T front and 11-34 rear, and its not low enough...but I don't do much climbing with this bike.

    I would get get a 28T for the day that you know are going to be slow grinders.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwivelo55 View Post
    San Diego local....34 x 11-36
    Same here.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,266
    30x42 on my Specialized Enduro 29er. 800-900 gram tires. I could easily go 32 in the front, but the 30 allows for a little more of a bailout when I'm spent. I always try and gear for the worst case scenario. The 32 would give me a minimal advantage going down, for the trails I ride at least. Pumping is better at that point.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    432
    Tallboy LTC

    34 single ring
    40x11 10 speed rear with Hope 40

    Makes you faster but you pay a bit in sweat and effort.

  20. #20
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,416
    28/10-42 for me on my FS.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,485
    I was running 1x10 with 32/12-42, and now have a wider range on both ends with X01 28/10-42.

  22. #22
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,416
    Quote Originally Posted by kragu View Post
    I was running 1x10 with 32/12-42, and now have a wider range on both ends with X01 28/10-42.
    Same cassette I am running. I am using a RaceFace NW ring up front. I thought I would want to move up to a 30t ring but haven't had the desire to yet with the long climbs I do and unless I am on a fire road descent I don't miss a larger ring.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,485

    1X people what are your ratios

    I started using the 28t because I had it lying around and my Lunchbox wouldn't fit a bigger ring. I expected to need the 32t ring for my top gear, but 28/10 is faster than 32/12 and I don't really have the need for more. I don't *really* need the 28/42 either, but it's nice to have on those days where I'm not feeling all that great.

  24. #24
    Gotta pay to play
    Reputation: michaelscott's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    690
    32 x 20.

    I walk a lot.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    101
    32 with 11-34 (9spd) out back on a 26er.

    Love it, at least on the relatively short climbs where I live. Never hit anything steep enough to want a lower gear (but I stand and grind a few times a ride) and I've rarely run our of gear on the high end. If you sit and spin, you're going to need a smaller front or bigger rear.

    Not adding another divot into the rock and log obstacles (more clearance thanks to no big ring) is worth it in my book.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

  26. #26
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Unlike RaythePedaler, I converted my old Ellsworth Joker to 1X10 about 200 miles ago. That's a little under 6 weeks back, I think. i'm running a 32T Wolftooth up front, and a standard 11-36 10 speed cassette. SRAM X9 drivetrain...love the Type 2 derailleur.

    So far, no issues with not enough gears as far as climbing. I spin out at around 25-26 mph in the 32/11 gear, and I typically use ALL the gears in one ride, which really is how it should be.

    I must have the lightest 7" travel 'freeride sled' out there!

  27. #27
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,124
    I'm on 30x 11-36 atm and is about perfect. Couple spots takes a bit more to climb but they are short enough an short stand and mash takes care of it. Something I noticed is that im actually able to handle the long sustained climbs better now than before. Though I lost some of low range the extra leverage gain makes up for it but I don't end up spinning like mad and getting wiped out easily. Found I can't spin fast for long tires me out un a hurry and I had to watch power I laid down our I'd stand the front wheel up way to easy.

    Thing is honestly the ratios and all that are going to differ person to person. U need to play with them urself and find what works for u.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chuckanado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    172
    I went 1x9 about a year ago on my 26" fs, found that 32 front, 12-36 rear was the sweet spot for me. Then a week ago I busted my shifter in a crash, so I used that as an excuse to upgrade to 1x10. Still 32t front but swapped my old middle ring for a RaceFace NW. 11-36 in the rear, and like Old Ray I'm running SRAM X9 with the type 2 RD. I don't feel like the gearing limits me except in a few extreme cases. Like tigris99, I found the occasional stand-n-mash works fine vs. sit-n-spin that I used to do with a granny ring. Top end is fine, I rarely want or need to go faster than 20-ish mph.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,804
    First off that is a crazy climb to distance ratio, so I would not put too much into how hard it was unless it is a regular ride for you.

    I have been all over the map. As high as 36/36, but have settled on 34/42 with 275. On my 26 I am running 36/42.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    389
    Laguna trails, 32 x 10-42, 11 speed - going to try a 34 front. 27.5" wheels.

    Figure wtf not, I don't ride canyon acres anyway.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,369
    30t up front with a 36-11 10 speed cassette in the back. Was great when I was riding 3 times a week, but for my new father every-other-weekend-warrior status, I really struggle sometimes. 11-speed upgrade is in my future, maybe even dropping to 28t up front. Like the guy earlier said... my high gear is gravity.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    193

    1X people what are your ratios

    Great thread! I contemplated this recently and went with

    30 and 11-36 10sp on fatboy
    32 And 11-34 9sp on enduro 26"

    I think 30 11-36 would be better on enduro. I prefer spinning though.



    If



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jetboy23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,226
    My 1x9 FS is running 34x11-34 with a 26" wheel. I don't feel like i want a spinier gear. I would walk faster.

    My SS is running 33x19 on a 650b wheel. Plenty of trips up Blackstar, Maple Springs, Indian TT, and Harding TT with that. Even did the Counting Coup on it for 44mi and 8000ft+. And i'm weak and slow. Although, most of my rides average between 15-20mi. So, an easier gear would be wasted imo.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    396
    FS 29er - 28t front ring w/ 11/40 rear (40t ring on an XT cassette)
    HT 29er - 30t front ring w/ 11/42 rear (42t ring on an XT cassette)

    Ride mostly Turnbull and Oaks. Climbs those hills pretty easily with this gearing. When it's time to replace these front rings, will probably go 30t and 32t.

  35. #35
    ocd
    ocd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    579
    Niner EMD 9... I keep buying other bikes and I keep riding the Niner.

    1x9
    32x12/32

    Never been a problem until I get real lazy... then it's sit and spin and be miserable time.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    233
    26er AM bike. 30/42 found this is pretty perfect with the 11speed. Climbing in Ventura County and Santa Barbara. I have a 32 that I have yet to swap to yet because I like the 30 so much.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    285
    Stumpy fsr 29 9 speed 32 front, 34 back. Almost perfect, when Ill change to 10 speed and 36 or 40 back, Its gonna be perfect.

  38. #38
    XC Hack
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    308
    Kona Hei Hei Supreme
    1 x 10: 32 x 11-36

    This works for 95% of what I ride here in So Cal. (mostly OC trails). I had to learn to get out of the saddle a little more--something that I really like riding style-wise now.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    45
    I was mainly after a weight reduction to help the bike on the climbs I do in the Marshal Canyon Claremont La Verne loops I ride so I went to a 30x11-42 with a X9 DER on my Process and haven't looked back. Running a Raceface NW up front and a 1Up conversion on the rear... works great. Have been contemplating going to a 32 up front to try and get a little top end back but not all that motivated yet because everything is working so well at the moment.
    2016 Pine Mountain 2 with a few mods.
    2015 Process 111 with a few mods.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Merlin_57 View Post
    I was mainly after a weight reduction to help the bike on the climbs I do in the Marshal Canyon Claremont La Verne loops I ride so I went to a 30x11-42 with a X9 DER on my Process and haven't looked back. Running a Raceface NW up front and a 1Up conversion on the rear... works great. Have been contemplating going to a 32 up front to try and get a little top end back but not all that motivated yet because everything is working so well at the moment.
    If you end up selling that 32, sell me your old 30...?

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mojojojoaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    761
    To the OP I know that climb and its a doozy...I don't think I ever hit that with anything less then my granny....old legs.

    Right now I live in Utah and switch between a 1x set up of 27x36 and 30x36. I use the NSB 27 and 30 with AKA cranks with great success and its an easy switch. The 27x36 I think is equal to the 24x32 I used to use anyways so its a comfortable ratio- the 30x36 pushes me a little more and is great for when I am back in California or trying to enforce my fitness and feeling awesome.

  42. #42
    Warrior's Society
    Reputation: mtnbikej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    6,765
    My 1x Ratios:

    Highball Al 32 x 21 yes it is a 1x1....SS

    TalllboyC 2 32 x 11/36

    I am in OC and ride the SS 95% of the time. This includes everything in the Santa Ana's, Big Bear, Santa Monica's, plus all of the County Parks. Climbs are not really an issue.

    The Tallboy was a 1x9 with 32 x 12/34 but I wanted to get a Type 2 derailleur, so I bumped up to 10 speed....however I was perfectly happy on the 1x9.

    In the year that I have been 1x9/10, there has only been 1 ride where I wished I still had a bailout gear...that was in Moab.
    I resolve to constantly assert my honest opinion on anything and everything - whether it is requested or not.
    Bucky the Cat

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    219
    On my Enduro 29 I run a Race Face 30t on the front and One Up 42t on the rear. Rode McGill trail last Saturday and I'm very glad that I had the ratio I did. 10 miles up with 3400'. It was brutal but awesome.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    79
    On my Ripley I run 32 with the 11-42.
    On my Tracer T275 I tried to get a little more speed so went with the 30 and the 11-42. I am now beating some of my Ripley climbing PR's which I was not expecting.

  45. #45
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    SART was no problem with 32 with 11-36 on both 29 and 26. Was more annoyed by lack of mash-ability in my highest gear on the descents than spin-ability in climbing gears. Last time I did SART with 2x, I was loving the DH portion from Southfork to Middle Control Rd, but my legs gave out by the end and was getting chain drop issues. Did San Juan Trail with a couple stops with same gearing on my 29er (set my PR with 1x), but didn't find a lack of high gearing on the downs as it was more than fast enough for me to handle. Local cat 3 and cat 4 rated climbs can be a bit of a slog, but that's more because I dislike those particular climbs than the gearing.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryanmj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwivelo55 View Post
    San Diego local....34 x 11-36
    Quote Originally Posted by mbell View Post
    Same here.
    same here

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    963
    32T 11-36 on my Epic and so far really happy. Able to climb everything I used to so far but this bike climbs really well anyway. No regrets going 1 X 10.

  48. #48
    chasing simplicity
    Reputation: MattMay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    581
    Santa Cruz 5010 carbon, Raceface Next SL direct mount
    1X10: 30T front, 11-36 rear (Shimano shadow der)

    this week going to 32T front and SRAM X01 10-42 (requires XD driver and new front shifter obviously) because I've been going to Mammoth and need a little more range, mostly top end.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,609
    Don't forget the rear derailleur.

  50. #50
    chasing simplicity
    Reputation: MattMay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    581
    yep yep, X01

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    963
    I too would prefer to go 1X11 but just cannot justify the cost at this time. It would be nice to have the broader range no doubt. Perhaps down the road I'll buy the XX1 shifter, chain, RD and cassette and make the swap. Not sure my existing XO crank would be an issue and may save me some costs.

  52. #52
    XC Hack
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    308
    I was happily using a 32 x 11-36 XT 10 spd but am now adding a Wolf Tooth 42 and 16 to my bike. The 11-36 was fine for 95% of what I ride in OC (Santiago Oaks, Aliso, Whiting, etc) but I'm getting too old not too, lol. It'll be nice having a little relief.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    176
    30 up front with 11-42 10 sp on the rear.

    Race face NW and wolftooth in back.

    Still have problems getting my 36lb enduro evo expert up hills.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robncircus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    464
    Thought I'd bump this with an update. I finally went from a 32 to a 30 up front. Only two teeth but it's made a world of difference for me. Since each ratio for smaller it feels like 3-4 extra gears. That said, I do notice I spin out a hair earlier on some descents.

    Overall I'm happy with the new radio

  55. #55
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,107
    1x9. 36 up front on a 32 lb all mountain bike
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dirt Donkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by robncircus View Post
    To be honest this thread was promoted by the misery of climbing to the suicide trail in agoura. We took a trail from king James road that laid me out and made me rethink ratios. Thanks for the responses thus far.

    Sent from my XT1030 using Tapatalk
    I walk a good chunk of that climb on my 3x!

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    131
    30T x 10-42T.

    all you guys with anything bigger upfront must be quite in shape. I top out on the road to and from the trails, but I'm not wanting for top end speed on the trails.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    14
    34T X 10-36T

    Only 3 months on it so far, definitely getting stronger. I climbed Holy Jim to Santiago Peak with this setup. Once I did that I knew I could handle most everything.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GGR Girl Wendy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    402
    28/40 on my 1x10 Canfield
    GGR Girl Wendy E

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kragu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,485

    1X people what are your ratios

    30 x 10-42 on my 27.5 Megatrail

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: k2rider1964's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,902
    Quote Originally Posted by morandi View Post
    30x42 on my Specialized Enduro 29er. 800-900 gram tires. I could easily go 32 in the front, but the 30 allows for a little more of a bailout when I'm spent. I always try and gear for the worst case scenario. The 32 would give me a minimal advantage going down, for the trails I ride at least. Pumping is better at that point.
    My thoughts exactly...I'm also down here in San Diego and run 30 x 42 on my Pivot Mach 6. Hadn't done it in over 10 years but climbed Nobel yesterday and was surprised how strong I felt. Last time I did it was on a 24 lb Trek Fuel. Hoping my Yeti SB5c comes in next week and I plan on running the same ratios on that bike but *might* try the 32 up front.

  62. #62
    Binned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    24,856
    53 up front, 10-42 in back.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    135
    27.5 32/11-42. 2200 avg climb per ride.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sponger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    466
    2X10, but the 26/36 arrives at the same ratio as a 32/42 on a 29er using the online calculator. Climbed Poles at Morro the other day in 26/36. I can't think of a steeper climb that I've done that wasn't a lot shorter. That said, I don't think I'll be needing anything lower than a 32/42 when I finally get around to a conversion.

  65. #65
    Dirty triathlete
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    609
    I keep thinking about dropping my large chainring to go 1x10, bit I'm afraid of losing anything up top for fast XC stuff, and afraid if trying to push anything taller then my low right now on some of the long climbs. And no budget for real upgrades either.

    How much weight savings are we really looking at? I'm at about 30 pounds right now, a few grams isn't going to make a difference.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tracysurf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    17
    I actually just experimented with this.
    I'm 28x11-42/29er... wore out my 28 and decided to jump to 32 up front. Hell no... it sucked. After thinking through it, questioned why I would want to limit my low end range.

    I feel the 28x11-42 on a 29er is a great mix for me... realizing it's not about ego or machismo, just wanting options to handle gnarly long climbs or for the days I don't want to bust a nut.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,266
    Running 30tooth, 10-42 back on my Enduro 29er.
    Just switched to a 30 tooth Absolute Black OVAL chainring on the front. I highly recommend trying out an Oval chainring. Has a slight learning curve, but the benefits are there. Less fatigue over the long haul, increases gear range (big gear feels bigger, low feels lower), I really like it in out of the saddle climbs. Its really nice when things get hard and steep easier to keep the pedals turning.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    11
    I went from a Raceface Turbine 2x10, 11-40 on to a XTR 1x 32t, 11-40 on my HD3. and far it's hard. I'm going to get a 1up 45t from Terry(CycleWerks) this week and see what it feels like this weekend. I'll keep you posted. I've only been riding for 8 months, so I'm not that in shape yet lol

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    49
    1x9 28t wolf tooth with a 11-40(40t ext cog) had a 30 upfront but 28 is better for me now I can climb better

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: socal_jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,106
    How things work out front chainring wise is very dependent on suspension design, went to 1x10 32t/12-36t on a RIP9 legs would feel hammered on a ride I do easily on my 32t front SS bike. Discovered this website which pretty much explains it; Linkage Design

    Just look up brand and model if available but RIP9 drops well below 100% pedaling efficiency with a normal mid-range front, would need something in the 20s to feel like a good climber again. Looks like most DW links work out well, many but not all VPPs(depends on generation quite a bit).

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by socal_jack View Post
    How things work out front chainring wise is very dependent on suspension design, went to 1x10 32t/12-36t on a RIP9 legs would feel hammered on a ride I do easily on my 32t front SS bike. Discovered this website which pretty much explains it; Linkage Design

    Just look up brand and model if available but RIP9 drops well below 100% pedaling efficiency with a normal mid-range front, would need something in the 20s to feel like a good climber again. Looks like most DW links work out well, many but not all VPPs(depends on generation quite a bit).
    100% anti-squat doesn't mean 100% pedaling efficiency. It means in theory that the force trying to compress the rear suspension from acceleration of your mass is equal to the force (created by chain tension) trying to extend the rear suspension.

    In reality, it isn't that good of an estimate, because of all the other stuff going on, like weight shifts caused by up and down pedal motion and other body movement.

    Also, since acceleration is variable and very small when climbing on a mountain bike, the acceleration force on the suspension will vary from zero to some number and the anti squat will vary continuously as you pedal anyway.

    But, in general, anti squat numbers can give you a general idea. Really high anti squat numbers can mean the suspension stiffens up a lot from chain tension. That can mean less suspension movement, and less small bump compliance. On the flip side, low AS can mean more small bump compliance but maybe also more energy lost in suspension movement.

    there is no best number and some people prefer more compliance and some prefer less. For rough rocky climbing, the energy savings from suspension bump absorption is a less quantifiable factor to throw into the consideration and is more important than energy losses through pedaling squat.

    I would also caution anyone trying to figure out how a bike rides by looking at a graph.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    One other thought on the chain ring size effect on suspension performance, I notice very little if any difference in my suspension when using different sized rings.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: theMISSIONARY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    198
    Commencal Meta 55

    26" minion 2.5's currently running 30/32 Absoluteblack x 11-40 (40t and 16T one-up)

    i was running a raceface 34 but once the minions went on it was just killing any climbing ability

  74. #74
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    100% anti-squat doesn't mean 100% pedaling efficiency. It means in theory that the force trying to compress the rear suspension from acceleration of your mass is equal to the force (created by chain tension) trying to extend the rear suspension.

    In reality, it isn't that good of an estimate, because of all the other stuff going on, like weight shifts caused by up and down pedal motion and other body movement.

    Also, since acceleration is variable and very small when climbing on a mountain bike, the acceleration force on the suspension will vary from zero to some number and the anti squat will vary continuously as you pedal anyway.

    But, in general, anti squat numbers can give you a general idea. Really high anti squat numbers can mean the suspension stiffens up a lot from chain tension. That can mean less suspension movement, and less small bump compliance. On the flip side, low AS can mean more small bump compliance but maybe also more energy lost in suspension movement.

    there is no best number and some people prefer more compliance and some prefer less. For rough rocky climbing, the energy savings from suspension bump absorption is a less quantifiable factor to throw into the consideration and is more important than energy losses through pedaling squat.

    I would also caution anyone trying to figure out how a bike rides by looking at a graph.
    Quoted for emphasis. Rewording it to see if I can make it clearer.

    100% anti-squat doesn't mean 100% pedaling efficiency. It means that the bike, with the rider's CoG in a particular spot, accelerates forward without squatting nor extending. The chain tension pulls on the swingarm downward just enough to counter the squat that typically occurs from the rider's weight shifting rearward, but doesn't counter the rider shifting their weight up and down, such as when they rock their hips to unweight one side of the bike to weight the other. You are losing power to turn the wheel, so the suspension can act on bumps from its "ideal sagged" position. The net effect is no bobbing in the saddle. This is why many XC race focused FS bikes do not have 100% anti-squat. It's more like it's "100% suspension efficiency", than it's "100% pedaling efficiency". That's on level ground anyways, with the bike sagged. Whether the bike is pitched up/down a hill, and how steeply it is pitched, and where the bike is in its travel range, the amount of anti-squat changes. For close to 100% pedaling efficiency you would have to let the rearward weight shift squat the bike without countering it by pulling the swingarm down, nor squatting it any more by pulling the swingarm up (probably around 75% anti-squat), but in this case you'd still lose efficiency to your suspension compressing when you push more downward on the pedals. To actually better counter the rearward weight shift + the rider weight shifts, you'd need more like 120% anti-squat, if you really wanted to counter pedal bob.

    The graphs help greatly, only if you can interpret them correctly and can correlate between what your senses tell you. The misconception of bob = inefficiency, is one that's been really annoying to deal with. The FS will be less pedal efficient, even if the bob is absolutely imperceptible. No real way around it, besides replacing the shock with something that can't compress and extend. It is merely a different strategy to focus more on a shock that isn't clogged up with damping designed to mask the bob, for better overall suspension performance, masking the bob through the frame linkages (which can add complexity also). The XC race focused companies figure it's better to have more power going to the wheel, finding a balance between small bump compliance/comfort, traction, and control at speed for their riders' needs, and offering a way to lock out the suspension so it can't compress/extend for when you really need pedaling efficiency. For trail riding where I'm not concerned about racing, I'd rather have the better susp performance, than the pedaling efficiency, hence why the bikes like those with DW Link are more popular with the casual trail riding crowd, than with the pro racing crowd.

    The relation between suspension performance and AS doesn't stop when you stop pedaling. The suspension on high AS bikes can feel stiff when you're not pedaling due to chain growth and kickback. As the rear axle gets further from the BB, it pulls on the chain causing the cranks to want to backpedal. By standing on the pedals and trying to keep them level, you are preventing the cranks from rotating back, and that prevents the suspension from compressing as easily, creating additional feedback through the pedals. The force going into the compression, that tries to rotate the cranks back, goes into the turning the wheel instead; if you took off from a jump and bottomed out, and that created 10 degrees of kickback, but you landed it solidly, cranks level, the rear wheel would be propelled forward as if you turned to cranks 10 degrees forward. This is what's behind the "pedal reactive" feel that some report that they feel on VPP bikes, but also is responsible for the feeling that you might die if you pedal on rough terrain, since the force of a bump + kickback can throw you off the pedals if your feet are in a vulnerable location in the pedal stroke, such as at between 12+6 and 2+8 o'clock. A wheel acceleration in a bump also reduces traction as well, though only as much as if you tapped the brakes. Whether it feels stiff or plusher, depends on how far in the stroke the suspension is and what the wheel rate (or forces curve) is like. Squatting actually makes the suspension feel plusher in most cases, but too plush will feel wallowy. In that regard, it depends on what the midstroke looks like on the wheel rate curve (or forces curve) looks like, with a "hammock" like curve feeling plusher than a more linear one, but whether or not that is better depends on the rider, and whether or not they like soft midstroke feel, or prefer a supportive one that the linear one provides.

    You'd notice for sure if you had a triple ring, changing gears on the same ride, instead of merely going maybe 2t-4t difference on a single ring between rides.
    Last edited by Varaxis; 08-06-2015 at 12:42 PM.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    47
    SC TBc 29r, 32*11-40 / 11sp - works for most stuff in Adelaide, South Australia. Not racing.
    SC SLa 26, 32*11-36 / 10sp - a lot more work, will change this to Praxisworks 11-40 / 10sp in near future I think.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  76. #76
    Dirty triathlete
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    609
    Demoed an XX1 equipped FSi Lefty this weekend at a stage race (hill climb, down hill, crit, and XC). I really loved not having to think at all about the second shifter. I think it had a 32 front, but don't remember. While there were a few tough climbs where a couple teeth lower would have been nice, I wouldn't go lower. I never had to bail (good thing since my cleats are trapped in the shoe tread), but it was work. A bike that weighs nothing might have helped too.

    So 32/11-42 I suppose is what you're looking for.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: socal_jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    100% anti-squat doesn't mean 100% pedaling efficiency. It means in theory that the force trying to compress the rear suspension from acceleration of your mass is equal to the force (created by chain tension) trying to extend the rear suspension.

    In reality, it isn't that good of an estimate, because of all the other stuff going on, like weight shifts caused by up and down pedal motion and other body movement.

    Also, since acceleration is variable and very small when climbing on a mountain bike, the acceleration force on the suspension will vary from zero to some number and the anti squat will vary continuously as you pedal anyway.

    But, in general, anti squat numbers can give you a general idea. Really high anti squat numbers can mean the suspension stiffens up a lot from chain tension. That can mean less suspension movement, and less small bump compliance. On the flip side, low AS can mean more small bump compliance but maybe also more energy lost in suspension movement.

    there is no best number and some people prefer more compliance and some prefer less. For rough rocky climbing, the energy savings from suspension bump absorption is a less quantifiable factor to throw into the consideration and is more important than energy losses through pedalling squat.

    I would also caution anyone trying to figure out how a bike rides by looking at a graph.

    Aware of all that but the point remains that not every suspension system is going to feel the same with say a 32T chainring 1x10 etc, what may work on one bike may not work on another and for personal tastes in pedal feel. Just using that metric as a raw gauge. RIP9 worked fine as a 2X but as 1X using larger ring for climbing sucks, changing to 40-42T in back will have little effect on that issue, whereas the WFO9 has been tuned for 1X.

    By the same token, it's almost impossible to give someone else on another bike/system advice on 1X chainring size and gearing etc without taking suspension design into consideration. The feel they have in the granny ring for many suspension designs will not feel the same in the middle ring, pedalling platform shock can affect things to a point. Notable exceptions are DW link(have owned one on a Iron Horse) and some VPP based suspensions. At the other end of the spectrum Lenz single pivot have some of the "worst" numbers but some people like that for chunky climbing.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by socal_jack View Post
    Aware of all that but the point remains that not every suspension system is going to feel the same with say a 32T chainring 1x10 etc, what may work on one bike may not work on another and for personal tastes in pedal feel. Just using that metric as a raw gauge. RIP9 worked fine as a 2X but as 1X using larger ring for climbing sucks, changing to 40-42T in back will have little effect on that issue, whereas the WFO9 has been tuned for 1X.

    By the same token, it's almost impossible to give someone else on another bike/system advice on 1X chainring size and gearing etc without taking suspension design into consideration. The feel they have in the granny ring for many suspension designs will not feel the same in the middle ring, pedalling platform shock can affect things to a point. Notable exceptions are DW link(have owned one on a Iron Horse) and some VPP based suspensions. At the other end of the spectrum Lenz single pivot have some of the "worst" numbers but some people like that for chunky climbing.
    There have been a ton of conversions to 1x systems with the use of a one up or wolf tooth giant cog. There is a very long thread on it around here. I recall very few comments about issues with a different feel when climbing, or worse climbing, or any suspension effects at all. I would guess that you are extra sensitive or extra picky about this issue, i.e. how much your suspension stiffens under chain load.

    I think most people can accept a pretty large range of anti-squat values. Like I said, I do not notice a difference when changing rings, even on 2X drivetrains, although on a 2X I'm usually climbing in the small ring.

    Maybe the RIP 9 is extra sensitive to chain ring size, but looking at the numbers, it doesn't seem so. And DW link and VPP behave basically the same as any other suspension, with anti-squat decreasing as chain ring size increases.

    Some examples of anti-squat changes with chainring size:
    Fuel (single pivot)
    24 x 36 - AS=100
    38x36 - AS=68

    Rip 9 (mini link)
    22x36 - AS=95
    32x36 - AS=73

    Flux (DW)
    24x36 - AS=122
    32x36 - AS=104

    TBLT (VPP)
    22x36 - AS=110
    32x36 - AS=88

    Sight (Horst)
    24x36 - AS=141
    38x36 - AS = 110

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    963
    I run a 30t RaceFace SL NW direct mount with a 10-42 XX1 out back on a 29er XC race bike. I am very happy with this ratio. The 10 in the rear gives me substantial top speed and the 42 obviously is quite low. Being here in So-Cal, we have a LOT of steep climbs, so even though the bike is stupid light, I like the 30t up front. I may try a 32 at some point as I rarely use the 42 out back.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10
    30:40 on my 26" Ibis HDR. Perfect for Aliso.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11
    30t RaceFace NW with a One Up Components 42

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    581
    Chromag Stylus hard tail.

    32 front with 11/34 cassette. Fine until I get lazy/busy and don't ride. Then, hurts like hell to get back in shape.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    210
    Lots of people leaving their wheel sizes out! Your wheel size affects how tall your gearing is.

    I'm running 30/11-40 on my 5010 with 170mm cranks and flat pedals. Just enough top end for recreational trail riding IMO (maybe not road, but who cares). I do have to walk some of the super steep, long climbing sections on some of my local trails, but I feel like if I went any lower than 30/40, then I'd be riding so slow that I might as well just get off and walk anyway. I'll probably upgrade to 30/10-42 when the price comes down a little more, but I'm happy with what I've got for now.
    Last edited by dlxah; 08-14-2015 at 03:33 PM.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,816
    30/11-42 on 650b wheels...

    Wheel size definitely makes a difference. Rode a 29er w/ 1x9, 32 up front - no expander out back and it seemed a smidgen easier.

    -------------------------------------
    Opinions are like A-holes... everybody
    has one & they're usually full of...??
    to err is human... to face plant is frickin hilarious!!

Similar Threads

  1. XT 30 spd vs XX1 Ratios
    By rotovegas in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-08-2013, 04:02 PM
  2. Do people still think 29er's are not for short people?
    By offrhodes42 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-24-2013, 06:00 AM
  3. Chain Ratios
    By rushman3 in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-12-2012, 10:42 PM
  4. Why the same gear ratios?
    By Jim Holloman in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 12-21-2011, 05:10 PM
  5. Crank Ratios
    By roadrunner in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-08-2011, 01:38 PM

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

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