Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    Occasional treat
    Reputation: hollisimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    197

    1x9 - move up to double or triple for xc racing?

    I've been running 1x9 for the last year & have loved every minute of it. Currently on a 32 chainring and 11-32 cassette. Next year though I intend starting xc racing. The races round these parts intersperse long boring fireroads amongst tight twisty singletrack so figure I need something larger than 32 onto 11 to keep up the pace on the flats & decents- I'm missing those carefree freewheeling days already Anyway, I see two main options- put on a triple upfront and run a 11-25 cassette on the back (nice rolling weight saving there). Or go with a double up front & keep the 11-32 cassette (simpler & less shifting, probably). I'd appreciate any advice or observations, thanks.

  2. #2
    College Boy
    Reputation: Timeless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    766
    I might like to point out even removing weight off your cassette is not going to help much more than just the lost weight. They are very small and compact so that part does not help out much.

    I would run the 11-32

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,011
    I would probably make the front ring larger, maybe 38t, and hope for the best. Or keep the 32t and add a 42t for those long straight fireroads. I cant' imagine you would need anymore than that.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Steve Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    65
    the cassette will be fine, but you'll need more gears upfront. I would go triple, you are going to need a shifter and front mech anyway, so why not put that inner ring on too?
    Them long slow drags can be hard work if you ain't got a low gear to spin IME

  5. #5
    veldrijder
    Reputation: jmoote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,083
    Keep the 1x9 and run a bigger chainring, and if needed go to an 11-34 cassette to keep your bottom gear low enough.

    38/11(=3.45) or 36x11(=3.27) is quite a bit faster than 32/11(=2.91), but 38/34(=1.12) or 36/34(=1.06) isn't too different than 32/32(=1.0)

    If you look at the numbers you'll see that all you're really losing over a triple is the last cog on the cassette, so unless you plan to use 44/11 often it's much easier to just run a bigger chainring. Since you're already running 1x9, the low gear should still be low enough - more or less equivalent to losing your 32 from the current setup.

  6. #6
    'All over it!'
    Reputation: lornibear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,105
    Although not racing, I am planning to run a 38/22 up front and an 11-32 on the rear. Should be the best of both worlds for what I am planning to use my bike for. Haven't tried it yet, but will keep you posted.

  7. #7
    Occasional treat
    Reputation: hollisimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoote
    If you look at the numbers you'll see that all you're really losing over a triple is the last cog on the cassette, so unless you plan to use 44/11 often it's much easier to just run a bigger chainring. Since you're already running 1x9, the low gear should still be low enough - more or less equivalent to losing your 32 from the current setup.
    That's interesting. I hadn't realised the front/rear ratio varied to a larger degree at the low end of cassette relative the the high end. I'll definitely try going without the 32 up back on my current setup to see if I handle it. If I can build up the strength it would surely be worth it.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Killroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    881
    Keep the 1X9 if you have a good chain line. I race 1x9 with a 40t up front and 11X34 in the rear. It was perfect for 4th in sport at Sea Otter, thank you very much.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flat Ark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,530
    I have run a 1X9 for the last 6-9 months and have recently gone back to a triple. I "personally" can't see any reason not to run a triple (especially for racing). Anytime the trail gets flat or even slightly downhill I have found myself at a huge disadvantage without the big ring. I am also running X0 twisties which actually work as a friction derailleur and have not dropped the chain even once. You can still ride a triple like it is a 1X9 or 2X9, but you can't ride either of those like they were a 3X9. Just more options should you need or want them with the triple.

  10. #10
    No longer 26
    Reputation: G-Live's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,071
    Go 2x9. Run a 26/38 or 26/40 combo. Put the gear ratios on a spreadsheet to figure out if you need more or less on the high and low ends. 26/38 loses only about 2 cogs of off the high end and low end of a triple. But you save some weight and gain chainring clearance. Since you run 1x9 with a 32 now, I doubt you would miss the lowest end or highest end of a triple. I run 24/36 on 2 29ers. The HT has an 11-32 cassette, the FS has an 11-34. Works great for me.

    G
    You can't depend on honest answers from dependant hands...

  11. #11
    Rod
    Rod is online now
    Endorphin Junkie
    Reputation: Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,189
    I haven't tried G-live's idea, but it sounds like a winner. While riding in Kentucky I never use my granny great and I'm never in my highest gears on the trails. Whenever I need to replace my chain rings I'll have to try his idea.

Posting Permissions

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