No Front Derrailleur: new frame designs?
reading an article on the new XX1 transmission two remarks got my attention:
1. the people from Sram said it opened up new possibilities for frame-designers
2. also they mentioned some suspension-designs are more or less affected on a certain chainring
note: of course less expensive groupsets of the 1x11 need to be marketed to make "new frames economically possible"
how do "we" Turner-aficionados think of these? And what to expect in the future?
(sorry for my English, not my native language)
I read the same, cleaner lines, slightly lowered weights by Upto 30g approx. the rear cassette will have a no.42 I believe and that's a huge jump & something to get used to for some. Saves money and prevents chain suck.
I am not convinced for my XC style & steep mountain climbs...
I am a mountain bike rider, and to me that means riding steep rocky terrain up and down. For IMBA type sanitized trails, yes, 1x will be fine. Also for those that ride the same terrain all the time you can tune the front ring to your steeper pitches and coast the faster descents, as most of us really don't need the 'highest' gears on a triple, but do NOT expect to be able to match your multi ring gearing with a single, either you give it up on the flats and gradual downs or you will be limited on steep climbs. Something has to give and on real mtb terrain, especially if you are riding into unknown terrain that something will be your legs. Or you can walk, I prefer to shift and ride, if I wanted to walk I would sell the bikes.
Velobum and I rode up Dunn Rd, then up Hahn Buena Vista to Art Smith on Monday. This is not a long ride by many riders description, but it is a good old fashioned mountain bike ride with everything possible covered. If this would have been a truly long ride I would have been destroyed and needed a lot more time to get out. I needed all 3 rings, cause we started the ride on pavement spinning for miles to get to dirt, here the 39 was fine. Then we climbed for long periods on 15%+ with pitches over that in loose terrain so standing much is not an option, with miles to go and steep loose terrain a 22 or even a 24 would have been a huge benefit for leg preservation and the ability to ride tough sections with a little 'cushion' to pause and re-attack, and in the end we still had to ride for miles on the 'big ring' to get back. Oh, and I was riding a low geared double and cursing it, so yes, I know I wanted 3 rings. The low was not low enough and the only way to get lower and not loose my 39 or preferably bigger would be a triple.
So bah humbug to the limited gear thing. I know for those that can't adjust derailers or want to look cool a single or last year a double was the ticket.
Turnerbikes: I have 36-11t on my rear & 42-27t in the front cranks - this gets me up the harshest gradients better than my road bike 28-11t & compact front.
For all mountain I assume you are saying you will need the triple range?
Clearly, the x1 crank is going to be favored by those not needing to pedal steep gradients so DH based.
Bravo, sir! It's good to see you figuring some things out. I've known this since 1994. :D
Originally Posted by turnerbikes
I am also still on the triple bandwagon and feel like a retro grouch not going with the doubles. I pretty much always ride the road to my trails and there are several sections of trail I regularly ride where I hit the big ring to carry as much speed through a saddle or it’s just slightly downhill single track that is fun faster in the big ring. All that being said the key is to share opinions/experiences without implying one’s own way is best and everyone else’s idiotic.
The piece that I do want is to ride a manufacturer’s bike who still designs for a triple – don’t change Dave…
On a possibly weird side note, my Fatback also has a triple on it and the big ring only see action on the road downhill back to my house from my most common winter snow ride.
Triple crankset still works best for me. Most of the time in the NE I swap the big ring for a bash and can cope with everything on my local trails in the middle 32 and a 34 cassette. But when racing NUE 100 milers I use all 3 front rings.
Except I've decided to do some of the 100's next year on my SS :eek:
Roll on the new year when my new toy from DT arrives and I see how suitable it is for doing a 100 on :D
Add me to the list of triple users. It works and I don't see a need to limit my gears. Heck, I still have a triple on my road bike.
I've been liking the double set up. 24/36 and an 11-36 out back. I do have to coast the super long and fast downhills, but I find that even if I had the 44 on the triple I wouldn't have been pedaling any way. Climbing isn't much of an issue, still have plenty of low end.
My trails let me used a 1x10 but I like the option of a triple on my bike.
The gearing issue on mountain bikes is so misunderstood.
Too many riders chasing the "NEW"
It's great to see some common sense being played out.
In a perfect world wouldn't it be great to have a simple, no fuss chainline with infinite gear options?
Well, guess what? It doesn't work out that way.
If you want to be able to ride pretty much anywhere and not pretend that your comfortable being over geared then double ring upfront is the future, so much so this is where the big players (manufacturers) are making the most gains.
Anyone on the new Shimano double specific 38t, 24t XT chainset?
Well with a 10 speed 11-36t cassette it is perfect.
Nice short chainline, with minimal chatter on descents all the low gears you would have had with a 22t granny ring on 9speed and big enough gears for everything else, I mean does anyone really need 44x11 on an all mountain setup like the 5spot??
Didn't think so.
What's everyone else riding?
3x9 for me, 22-32-44 and 34-11 on '11 5Spot, burly build around 32lbs. There are actually quite a few local rides (Socal) where I use the lowest and the highest gearing. I'm slow on the steep climbs and need that 22-34 granny fallback to get a breather, but also love DH speed and can peddle out the 44-11 at times. I guess I could coast, but why coast if you can have the gears to peddle?
I would not give up gearing on the bottom end, and guess I'd need a good reason to give up some gearing on the top end, and for me weight surely isn't it. I could see going to the 10 speed rear to get the clutch der, closer gearing steps and a bit wider range.... but don't see giving up my triple yet.
34-11 9 speed cassette with 22-32 bash ring. If I spin out in 32/11 I'm usually on a road. 22/34 is too low in almost all situations but I have used it. 1 x 11 would be right for me if I can keep the low end and have a high gear = to 32/13.
I still run 3x9's and replace the 44 with a 42 for more ground clearance and more usable gearing (how often do you go 35 MPH on the trail?). The 42 wears out more from being used as a "bash ring" than due to chain wear--the teeth do grip logs nicely tho!
I've been using 2x10 since this past spring. 38/26 front and 11-36 rear. I have yet to find anything steep enough that would require a lower gear mainly because at that point there wouldn't be enough traction. And 90% of the time I'm in the big ring up front, the granny is only used for really steep stuff when I'm worn out.
The only time I have wished for a larger gear is downhill on the road, but there aren't any trails close enough to ride to. From my perspective 2x10 is a better mousetrap. But I wouldn't be able to 1x10 without slowing down my downhills or cruising speed or changing my cadence.
I've been rocking a double 24/38 up front for the last two years.
That's as much as I'm willing to compromise, and don't see a XX1 system in my future.
As on old guy on a 29er, I will never give up my 22/32 up front and my 12/36 out back. A double up front works fine with a bash, since on the DH side of things I just don't need to pedal to go any faster....you can't gain any traction when you're in the air.:D
Choice is good and the 1x11 will find enthusiasts but for my fitness level and the varied terrain that we ride, I want a wider range of gearing options. I will probably make the change from 3x9 to 2x10 next time around though I doubt that will lead to a 1x11.
If your currently running a "twin and bash" then you are going to get (close to) the same range of gears from a 1x11. That's the attraction.
If you are running a 3x10 (or x9) and using all the front rings, then stop reading this thread.
This is my simplistic take on it. (No offence intended)
Happy New Year, rIde more,
Bring back the Highline.... A small version of the DWL DHR with 7'' of travel and AM Geometry. You have to do something special for the 20th Anniversary, right? That would be really cool... XX11 is perfect for Mini-DH frames.
not to mention....
...the cost of replacing that cog when it fails...thats gonna hurt!
Loving my Rohloff.....
Well, living in So. Fl., I'm going from a 2 x 9 to a 1 x 10 on my 5 Spot. I'm looking forward to the simplicity, and don't think I'll be giving up too much in the range of cogs I find useful.
I may end up throwing on the 2 x if I take the bike up to Georgia, but suspect by the time I'm used to it I won't even bother.
Will report further :thumbsup:
Triple for sure
Here in Switzerland for 90% of rides I ride to/from train stations on road (sometimes in a rush - so 44t front is good), and it is steep up (and down) so for the steep up the mountain goat stambecco 20t front is important, and this with 26" wheels.
So triple is a requirement, and for a 29" wheel bike I'd look at seeing if I could combine the 20t front with a 42 cassette rear, although who knows what tweaks are necessary to make that work - if it could work.