Results 1 to 39 of 39

Thread: Light Cassette

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    605

    Light Cassette

    Can someone help me with some questions

    It looks like guys are using Road Cassette's on their mountian bikes to save weight .....does it really matter? the XTR compared to the Dura Ace 7700 is much heavier. Can someone give me some good suggestions on light cassette's to use?

  2. #2
    locked - time out
    Reputation: Pay Here's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,411

  3. #3
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,007

    if you can get by with a 27T low gear...

    then go for it! Here is Florida it's more than enough and I use a 12-25 sometimes with a 44/32 set-up or 44/30T set-up. Most of the time it's a 12-27.

    DA, Ultegra or KCNC are good choices. if you can put a 20T up front, then a 12-27 will be fine!
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    796
    It's not about your low gear. I can ride 22T chainring with 27T cog for my lowest gear just fine but that doesn't mean it's a smart choice for mountain biking.

    The range of a 12-27 cassette is not big enough for real mountain biking.
    TRANSLATION: You have to shift the front derailleur WAY more to compensate.

    The ratios of a 12-27 cassette are just too close for real mountain biking.
    TRANSLATION: You have to double shift the rear derailleur just to feel an effect.

    If someone feels they have enough power to run a triple chainring setup with a 12-27 cassette, why don't they just run a double chainring setup with a 11-34 (or 11-32) cassette? That way you have the highest range possible on the cassette and also an improved chainline because you are running a 2x9 setup.

    Saving weight is great but it seems that this road cassette thing keeps coming up. Go to a World Cup event and count how many pros are riding road cassettes. Out of 100 bikes you will be lucky if you see 1 or 2 guys running a road cassette. Do you think they don't know about Dura-Ace?? These guys spend most of their time training on their Dura-Ace equipped road bikes...

  5. #5
    I love Pisgah
    Reputation: Duckman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,407
    After running 12-27DA cassettes off and on since 03, I tend to agree now. Its the performance while in the middlering that counts. One has really compromised his usable gear ranges when coupled with the DA cog. Until recently, both race bikes ran identical 42-30-20 setups(which is indeed low enough overall for the Pisgah kinda stuff) for years. I've found that you have to go to it(granny) way too much for my taste, especially when racing. Everytime you shift up front(which the FD is typically the weakest link on a mtb), your exposing yourself to maybe dropping a chain, not shifting at all(while under major load since you shifted too late), looking down while at speed, etc. Also you have to think more ahead(while your suffering) to make sure you don't turn a corner and instantly have to drop a ring up front(see 'not shifting' above).. I also continued to have major chainsuck issues with the Salsa 20t's I have. Never ever have had issues with my 22/24t's. More importantly..during an xc sprint race, the middle 30t(even better a 29t) coupled with an 11-32t/11-34t in the back, can cover most climbs for the short term(just go anerobic and power up it since its not an endurance event) and 80% of most courses here regarding top end(the other 20% is in the bigring maybe). For pure xc racing, I can see the 42/29t X 11-34 being the hot setup. Much less shifting and crap to think about in the heat of battle. So, the granny's now really only for the longer events/rides(after all, I am in the SE mtns) where I might need to spin up some climbs(that is if I want my legs to work 5-6 hours later into the race/ride).

    Long story short, for the added 3oz of weight, I've gained a ton of real world performance. Thats just me tho.
    Last edited by Duckman; 09-01-2006 at 05:36 PM.

  6. #6
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckman
    After running 12-27DA cassettes off and on since 03, I tend to agree now. Its the performance while in the middlering that counts. One has really compromised his usable gear ranges when coupled with the DA cog. Until recently, both race bikes ran identical 42-30-20 setups(which is indeed low enough overall for the Pisgah kinda stuff) for years. I've found that you have to go to it(granny) way too much for my taste, especially when racing. Everytime you shift up front(which the FD is typically the weakest link on a mtb), your exposing yourself to maybe dropping a chain, not shifting at all(while under major load since you shifted too late), looking down while at speed, etc. Also you have to think more ahead(while your suffering) to make sure you don't turn a corner and instantly have to drop a ring up front(see 'not shifting' above).. I also continued to have major chainsuck issues with the Salsa 20t's I have. Never ever have had issues with my 22/24t's. More importantly..during an xc sprint race, the middle 30t(even better a 29t) coupled with an 11-32t/11-34t in the back, can cover most climbs for the short term(just go anerobic and power up it since its not an endurance event) and 80% of most courses here regarding top end(the other 20% is in the bigring maybe). For pure xc racing, I can see the 42/29t X 11-34 being the hot setup. Much less shifting and crap to think about in the heat of battle. So, the granny's now really only for the longer events/rides(after all, I am in the SE mtns) where I might need to spin up some climbs(that is if I want my legs to work 5-6 hours later into the race/ride).

    Long story short, for the added 3oz of weight, I've gained a ton of real world performance. Thats just me tho.
    I agree. The shifting up front while hammering in a race is a bit of a handicap. I also dropped a chain off my 20t Salsa ring in my last race pedaling under load on a hill that caught me by surprise. No fun. I've not taken a 2x9 setup seriously until reading your words. You have given me something to think about on my next build.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  7. #7
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,007

    I agree with you, but it depends on your terrain.....

    Yes, the FD is the weakest point of the drivetrain. if you run a 12-27 rear and need to shift ofetn upfront, then this a bad choice just to sabe weight.
    I don;t care what FD, cables, cranks, shifters. etc you have. Shifting up front alot during a race is NOT good.

    But some riders terrian it can be used easlily! I live in the flat lands so I don't need to shift much or need higher than a 27T with a 42T front.
    I do a lot of road riding now and I acutally love the close ratios on the MTB.

    I only have to drop dwon the the middle/granny when I am shot and out of energy. Soem really strongs riders will do very well with a 42/32/22 & 12-27 set-up in all but the highest hills. Even a 30/27 should be fine.
    if you don't have to keep going back in froth between big and middle you should be ok.

    Now I agree with Mr Scary too. MOST riders in MOST terrians will great with 44 or 42T/32 or 34T set-up.

    If I had mountains I would run a 42/30T with a 11-34T in back.
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AZ-X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    363
    Now you guys are starting to see the light...

  9. #9
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,007
    Hey AZ-X be careful what you said. You are the one who convinced me to the the light with ISIS

    Again, this REALLY depends on your terrain, gear needs and pedlaing style.
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    Like DB says on flat terrain it seems like you can get away with a 12-27 easier. I can almost pull a 12-27 with a 42t front ring all the way on cross country without going to the middle ring very often. It's makeing me a better rider by pushing me to get to that level. The close ratio's are great for finding your sweet spot of power delivery.

    If a nice light 11/32 cassette comes out I'll go to 2x9. Sadly, running the middle ring and lowest gear in the cassette is not so easy on a Scott Scale Limited

  11. #11
    locked - time out
    Reputation: Pay Here's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,411

    BlackBox Ti Cassette ???

    FROM: PinkBike, http://www.pinkbike.com/news/2006-SR...ld-Worlds.html
    Julien’s Championship Rig:
    SRAM: X.0 twist shifters
    SRAM: X.0 rear derailleur
    SRAM: PC-991 Hollow Pin chain
    SRAM: BlackBox Ti Cassette
    RockShox: SID World Cup fork
    Avid: BlackBox Juicy Ultimate brakeset
    Anybody have any info on this "BlackBox Ti Cassette"?

    Jake Pay, ?ing Here..
    Last edited by Pay Here; 09-03-2006 at 12:59 PM.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AZ-X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    363
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRT BOY
    Hey AZ-X be careful what you said. You are the one who convinced me to the the light with ISIS

    Again, this REALLY depends on your terrain, gear needs and pedlaing style.

    Big difference DB. I've been exlculsively on 2x9 cranksets w/11-34t cassettes--even in rocky Arizona--for nearly 6 years now. I also seem to remember being ridiculed (resulting in long discussions) by many on this board for saying how good I felt the Eggbeater pedals were compared to the SPD style pedals I had been using, and SRAM X.0 shifters and deraileurs were when they first came out. Look at how poplular they've become now... There is no durability at issue here, only functionality. The bigger and stiffer, hollow spindles are still being used. They've just evolved to a design that integrates longer lasting bearings.

    It obviously depends on your terrain, but also on how much or little you want to shift when riding. When I talked about how much simpler it was, I was told by several that I didn't know what I was talking about--or that I would never have enough of a range of gears for real riding. There were plenty of people who were doing it before I tried it, so I always always wondering why there was so much resistance.

    As I said back then, I didn't do it primarily to save weight at all. Only to simplify my drivetrain. The slight weight savings and improved chainline were just fringe benefits in my opinion...

    Oh, yeah--and if someone still wants to "fly me out" and pay for my room and board to do that blind test of a Ti hardtail vs. an aluminum hardtail with the exact same components, I'm more than game to easily tell them the difference over rough terrain. I have a little more control of my free time these days.

    Sorry to go so far off topic.

    Lightest 11-34T cassette that I know of is still XTR. Nino seems to be working on raceday only, superlight 11-32t cassettes as well.

  13. #13
    Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
    Reputation: DeeEight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,771
    Quote Originally Posted by eurorider
    It's not about your low gear. I can ride 22T chainring with 27T cog for my lowest gear just fine but that doesn't mean it's a smart choice for mountain biking.

    The range of a 12-27 cassette is not big enough for real mountain biking.
    TRANSLATION: You have to shift the front derailleur WAY more to compensate.
    What is REAL mountain biking? Thru the late 80s and early 90s, most of us who XC rode/raced were quite happy with a 24T granny ring and 28T cog as our lowest gear. And that was with a 12T smallest cog btw !

    The ratios of a 12-27 cassette are just too close for real mountain biking.
    TRANSLATION: You have to double shift the rear derailleur just to feel an effect.
    Again, what is REAL mountain biking? Is the sky pink in your REAL world ? Perhaps you need to go back on your meds.

    If someone feels they have enough power to run a triple chainring setup with a 12-27 cassette, why don't they just run a double chainring setup with a 11-34 (or 11-32) cassette? That way you have the highest range possible on the cassette and also an improved chainline because you are running a 2x9 setup.
    Because double-ring setups generally are NOT lighter than triple-ring setups. And this is the weight weenie forum afterall we're discussing this in.

    Saving weight is great but it seems that this road cassette thing keeps coming up. Go to a World Cup event and count how many pros are riding road cassettes. Out of 100 bikes you will be lucky if you see 1 or 2 guys running a road cassette. Do you think they don't know about Dura-Ace?? These guys spend most of their time training on their Dura-Ace equipped road bikes...
    And yet, when a bike magazine features a top-pro's bikes... more often than not they've got road cassettes, or cassettes of similar "small" range.
    I don't post to generate business for myself or make like I'm better than sliced bread

  14. #14
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,007
    I have never seen a triple MTB lighter than a double. A doulbe will be lighter than a triple crankset.
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  15. #15
    Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
    Reputation: DeeEight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,771
    Losing the smallest ring and some bolts generally does not make up the weight gain of a larger range cassette unless you're buying something in the unobtanium price category.
    I don't post to generate business for myself or make like I'm better than sliced bread

  16. #16
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    11-32 Ti-cassette: 187g

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeEight
    Losing the smallest ring and some bolts generally does not make up the weight gain of a larger range cassette unless you're buying something in the unobtanium price category.
    well - i was/am riding 3x9 with 12-27 a couple of years now and just this summer tried 2x9 with 42/29 and 11-32 in the back. i like the fewer shifts and not to worry about the front chainring anymore BUT i found myself in a "wrong" gear on several occasions where the bigger gear was just too much effort and the lower gear too small. it really depends on your terrain. i'd say for really long climbs a narrow spaced road cassette offers better gear selection BUT on constant up and down terrain there is too much shifting involved...the 11-32 cassette has the gears spread farther apart which sometimes isn't matching your power or cadence. 11-34 is definitely out of the picture for me. way too big gaps. i never find the correct gear and have to go slower than i can.


    BUT
    at least the problem with the weight penalty going with 11-32 cassettes is solved ! i just got my second generation prototypes and the weights are indeed promising:
    11-32 = 187g (191g incl. Al-Lockring
    11-28 = 154 (158 incl. Al-Lockring)

    i will first have to ride them before i plan doing a limited quantity. but knowing there is no weight penalty with the big cassette is sweet, isn't it

    Eurobike updates later. i spent 4 days at the show and found some nice parts...
    Attached Images Attached Images

  17. #17
    Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
    Reputation: DeeEight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,771
    33 gram difference with your primo dollar cassettes (let's not kid ourselves, they ain't gonna be cheap). I do happen to have a stack of Coda 29T aluminium middle rings (yay ebay) which are perfect for 2x setups... I use one as a 1x8 setup with an 11-32 cassette and have pondered doing a 2x8/9 with one and a 42 or 44T outer ring. Anyways... Kooka 22T ring is 15 grams, the 32T is 40 grams, and 5 inner Al bolts for my Kooka crankarms are 5 grams. The coda ring is 26 grams. So I'd save 34 grams by swapping the 22T and 32T rings out for a 29T middle. And IF I had your super zoot cassettes, I'd be ONE WHOLE GRAM AHEAD by doing it.

    Yeah, that's reasonable for a couple hundred dollars worth of cassettes a year, to save one gram. Meanwhile those of us in the real world having to buy shimano / sram / sunrace / suntour cassettes ain't so lucky when it comes to options. And we have a bigger weight penalty to deal with between an 12-27 block and an 11-32 block. According to weight weenies lists, the DuraAce 12-27 (which btw is easily made into an 11-27 by switching the smallest cog) is 177g grams while the 11-32 XTR meanwhile is 240 grams... gee...63 gram difference.
    I don't post to generate business for myself or make like I'm better than sliced bread

  18. #18
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,007
    Did did not realize you were talking about the rear too.
    Correct!
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  19. #19
    STS
    STS is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: STS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    530
    nino, have you implemented it with the alu bigest cog?

  20. #20
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Questions: So is it possible to run a short cage DA RD w/ the 32 in back? I seem to remember some controversy about this. The weight penalty of a 2x9 (42/29) setup would be lesser if this were a solid alternative. Depends on the length of your deraileur hanger maybe? Also, is it possible to closely duplicate the gear range of the DA 12/27 with a 32 cassette and then maybe make a jump from a 28t to a 32t so as to retain most of the benefits of the closer gear selections on the DA cassette? Maybe this jump would be too big for the DA RD to tackle? The other thought that occurs to me is maybe we are focusing on the wrong issue. If it were possible to eliminate the handicap of shifting to the granny up front then a 2x9 setup would be less of an advantage. So, this means how do we get to the point where chainsuck and dropped chains going to the granny are eliminated? Impossible?
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  21. #21
    Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
    Reputation: DeeEight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,771
    Another thing to bare in mind with the larger cassette is you then need more chain if you're the sort who likes to set JUST enough to do a big-big crossgearing by accident. That's more weight to factor in when comparing a double with a 32T granny cog and a triple with a 27/28T granny cog.

    As to short cage derailleurs... I'm using older ones fine with 30T cogs. Shimano likes to claim you can't do it (to sell you the longer cage models) but in reality the short cages can handle the bigger cogs just fine. The only obvious reason to use a longer cage is the higher total chain capacity. Then again, us oldtimers are used to running 12-28 or 13-30 cassettes with 24-36-46 chainrings and Deore DX or XT short cage derailleurs and not minding the fact the chain drags/droops when in the granny ring and any cog smaller than oh a 21T. Why? Because after that its just overlapping gears with what's possible in the middle ring.

    There's also the fact that in the early 90s 7speed days, shimano offered a 13-34 cogset at the HG50 (deore LX and below), 70 (deore DX) and 90 (Deore XT) levels even though they didn't market any derailleurs which could officially work with larger than a 32T cog. Simply more evidence that they'll lie thru their little japanese teeth to sell ya stuff if it suits them.
    I don't post to generate business for myself or make like I'm better than sliced bread

  22. #22
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    hmm...

    Quote Originally Posted by Axis II
    Questions: So is it possible to run a short cage DA RD w/ the 32 in back? I seem to remember some controversy about this. The weight penalty of a 2x9 (42/29) setup would be lesser if this were a solid alternative. Depends on the length of your deraileur hanger maybe? Also, is it possible to closely duplicate the gear range of the DA 12/27 with a 32 cassette and then maybe make a jump from a 28t to a 32t so as to retain most of the benefits of the closer gear selections on the DA cassette? Maybe this jump would be too big for the DA RD to tackle? The other thought that occurs to me is maybe we are focusing on the wrong issue. If it were possible to eliminate the handicap of shifting to the granny up front then a 2x9 setup would be less of an advantage. So, this means how do we get to the point where chainsuck and dropped chains going to the granny are eliminated? Impossible?
    sorry D8, i don't get your math.

    anyway - pricewise my cassettes will be at XTR level . i'm not doing cassettes at insane prices. my intention was to have a viable alternative which is still not too costly.

    my 29t chainring weighs 19g
    my cassette now 192g
    no - the chain is still the same lenght than before when i had 3x9 with a 12-27 in the back!
    and i also use a short caged 10s DA derailleur (153g)

    i never have any slack in the chain. the DA derailleur does fine with this setup. to my surprise to be honest but it works absolutely flawless!!

    the 12-27 DA cassette can't be modified to 11-27 so easily. if you swap cogs the shifting ramps don't align which makes for unprecise shifting. the 11-28 i have posted above is still better spaced for mountainbiking and even lighter. it's just that you need powerful legs with 29/28 as your lowest gear or not so steep terrain. your choice.

  23. #23
    the train keeps rollin
    Reputation: snowdrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,213

    2x8 :thumbsup:

    I've been running a 2x8 for the last year..

    42t Sugino 65 grams
    29t FSA 25 grams
    11-30 M950 cassette 208 grams

    Works like a champ, the rear cassette spacing is primo.. I only suffer on the steepest climbs, so I now just pedal with a little more urgency on them.

  24. #24
    banned
    Reputation: JrockFeltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,748
    Quote Originally Posted by eurorider
    It's not about your low gear. I can ride 22T chainring with 27T cog for my lowest gear just fine but that doesn't mean it's a smart choice for mountain biking.

    The range of a 12-27 cassette is not big enough for real mountain biking.
    TRANSLATION: You have to shift the front derailleur WAY more to compensate.

    The ratios of a 12-27 cassette are just too close for real mountain biking.
    TRANSLATION: You have to double shift the rear derailleur just to feel an effect.

    If someone feels they have enough power to run a triple chainring setup with a 12-27 cassette, why don't they just run a double chainring setup with a 11-34 (or 11-32) cassette? That way you have the highest range possible on the cassette and also an improved chainline because you are running a 2x9 setup.

    Saving weight is great but it seems that this road cassette thing keeps coming up. Go to a World Cup event and count how many pros are riding road cassettes. Out of 100 bikes you will be lucky if you see 1 or 2 guys running a road cassette. Do you think they don't know about Dura-Ace?? These guys spend most of their time training on their Dura-Ace equipped road bikes...
    this all can be eliminated by riding a singlespeed.

  25. #25
    Hack Racer
    Reputation: Cheers!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,566
    If you choose to run a 2X9 setup on the bike (i'm using a 11-34t, on a tripple setup, of 22/32/44)... I know... I should've went with a 11-32t, but when I was buying a cassette at the time I was thinking... I know squat about gearing on bikes and what is needed, i'll just buy whatever specialized chose for my bike but in XT standard.

    when you guys talk about chainline on a 2x9 setup, you are removing the granny ring on the front. BUT! what I'm not understanding is, are you actually moving the middle and big ring closer to the frame of the bike to get a better chain line? Else how are you getting better chain lines if you need to get to the 34t in the middle ring and the middle ring hasn't been moved in.

    If you do move it in, how do you move it in? How do you adjust the spacing between the middle/big ring and the frame? Sorry about these newb questions, I've never taken the cranks or bottom bracket apart before.

  26. #26
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    different BB...

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheers!

    If you do move it in, how do you move it in? How do you adjust the spacing between the middle/big ring and the frame? Sorry about these newb questions, I've never taken the cranks or bottom bracket apart before.
    you need a different BB! a shrter axle is all you need to move the cranks inwards. with ISIS you can go with a 108mm "roadie" axle width, with square taper BBs you can go as narrow as 103mm, also octalink BBs have shorter roadie versions.

  27. #27
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Nino, how about a 12/29 cassette? This would allow one to run a 22t granny up front instead of a 20t, avoid the shifting issues involved with the 20t granny and still have the same gear range as running the 12/27 DA cassette in back with a 20t granny. The 11/28 would be very close but it would be nice the have that extra tooth for the really steep stuff. Or, I'm not aware of this, but I wonder how a 21t granny would do up front to aleviate dropped chains and chainsuck? Does anyone make a 21? This would duplicate the same range as the 12/27 DA and 20tgranny. Hmmmm?
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  28. #28
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    what's the problem with 20t?

    Quote Originally Posted by Axis II
    Nino, how about a 12/29 cassette? This would allow one to run a 22t granny up front instead of a 20t, avoid the shifting issues involved with the 20t granny and still have the same gear range as running the 12/27 DA cassette in back with a 20t granny. The 11/28 would be very close but it would be nice the have that extra tooth for the really steep stuff. Or, I'm not aware of this, but I wonder how a 21t granny would do up front to aleviate dropped chains and chainsuck? Does anyone make a 21? This would duplicate the same range as the 12/27 DA and 20tgranny. Hmmmm?
    i don't have any problems with my 20t up front. 20/28 is really low enough also for steep climbs. you either have a small cassette which is light or you go for the 11-32 right away.

  29. #29
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i don't have any problems with my 20t up front. 20/28 is really low enough also for steep climbs. you either have a small cassette which is light or you go for the 11-32 right away.
    What I meant by shifting issues w/the 20t was dropped chains and chain suck. This is not something I'm alone with. Many others havehad the same problems with the 20t granny. This is the weak point in the 12/27DA and 20/32/42 setup.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    796
    Quote Originally Posted by JrockFeltaz
    this all can be eliminated by riding a singlespeed.
    Sorry, I like my knees

  31. #31
    I love Pisgah
    Reputation: Duckman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,407
    Yup. Been fighting it all season on both the XTC and Spider(both ran a Salsa 20t). Brand new drivetrains on both as well. Endless chainsuck mostly, but sometimes its a dropped chain as well. Terrible even when I'd shift way ahead of time under zero load and zero mud conditions. Cost me aprox 10 places at one point in a race this summer after getting away with the lead breakaway. Grrrrrr. And since I'm in the SE and we have our share of mtns(next door to Pisgah)..with the 11-27DA cog I sometimes couldn't sustain the longer steep climbs while staying in the middlering, or at least and not go totally anerobic. Finally dug up my 22t's(have 4 Kooka grannys in purple, red, blue, black, new Action Tec titanium, and a box full of RF) and went to a 11-32 and/or 11-34xtr cogs. Its shifts SO MUCH BETTER going to/from the granny now. Seamless. AND more importantly..my now more effective 30t middle with the bigger cogs is so much better on most any course/ride. Hardly ever need the granny for racing(usually just longer steep stuff like our upcoming Firewater 50 race(8400' climbing over 47.5miles), but sure is nice not to hardly think about it now. Otherwise, its always the 42/30t thank you very much. Aside from the pure performance gain, its sooooo much better having way less to even think about now during the heat of battle. My still new DA cog now is on my best roadie wheels, so no biggie there.

    I think the chainsuck issues comes from the design of the Salsa 20t. It has that thicker body/thinner teeth setup not unlike an 8/9speed ring has. Seems like the chain wants to hang onto that shoulder below the teeth more so then any of the thinner bodied 22s I have.

  32. #32
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckman
    Yup. Been fighting it all season on both the XTC and Spider(both ran a Salsa 20t). Brand new drivetrains on both as well. Endless chainsuck mostly, but sometimes its a dropped chain as well. Terrible even when I'd shift way ahead of time under zero load and zero mud conditions. Cost me aprox 10 places at one point in a race this summer after getting away with the lead breakaway. Grrrrrr. And since I'm in the SE and we have our share of mtns(next door to Pisgah)..with the 11-27DA cog I sometimes couldn't sustain the longer steep climbs while staying in the middlering, or at least and not go totally anerobic. Finally dug up my 22t's(have 4 Kooka grannys in purple, red, blue, black, new Action Tec titanium, and a box full of RF) and went to a 11-32 and/or 11-34xtr cogs. Its shifts SO MUCH BETTER going to/from the granny now. Seamless. AND more importantly..my now more effective 30t middle with the bigger cogs is so much better on most any course/ride. Hardly ever need the granny for racing(usually just longer steep stuff like our upcoming Firewater 50 race(8400' climbing over 47.5miles), but sure is nice not to hardly think about it now. Otherwise, its always the 42/30t thank you very much. Aside from the pure performance gain, its sooooo much better having way less to even think about now during the heat of battle. My still new DA cog now is on my best roadie wheels, so no biggie there.

    I think the chainsuck issues comes from the design of the Salsa 20t. It has that thicker body/thinner teeth setup not unlike an 8/9speed ring has. Seems like the chain wants to hang onto that shoulder below the teeth more so then any of the thinner bodied 22s I have.

    OK, so maybe it's a flawed Salsa design as you say and not necessarily the fault of the 20t ring. I'm going to look into other 20t options and I'll see how that goes. Ti seems like the logical choice if thin will help.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: salimoneus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Duckman
    ...
    my now more effective 30t middle with the bigger cogs is so much better on most any course/ride.
    ...
    i'm planning on trying a 1x9, but want to drop the middle 32 down to a 30. what 30t middle ring are you running? the only 4 bolt 64mm ones i've been able to find are $$$

  34. #34
    I love Pisgah
    Reputation: Duckman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,407
    Both race bikes run 5bolt compacts.

    Edit: ops, this was for alimoneus question.

  35. #35
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    never heard of these problems...

    Quote Originally Posted by Axis II
    What I meant by shifting issues w/the 20t was dropped chains and chain suck. This is not something I'm alone with. Many others havehad the same problems with the 20t granny. This is the weak point in the 12/27DA and 20/32/42 setup.
    i never heard of such problems. many guys use this setup. i'd say it has more to do with your setup or the ring you use. is the chainline ok, is the chain worn, the shape of the ring...? i never had such problems at all.

  36. #36
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i never heard of such problems. many guys use this setup. i'd say it has more to do with your setup or the ring you use. is the chainline ok, is the chain worn, the shape of the ring...? i never had such problems at all.
    Duckman thinks it may have to do with the Salsa 20t ring being too wide that we both use. I dunno, but he may be correct but I'm kinda skeptical. The last time I posted my drivetrain setup on the Weight Weenies MTB forum I was ridiculed for using a 20t granny for just these reasons so I know others out there have experienced problems too. You prolly know what my setup is: RF Next LP, Salsa 20t, SS 32, SS42, SRAM Hollow pin chain, AC ISIS 113mm, DA 12/27, DA RD. The chainline is spot on and I check my chain for stretch religiously so the only thing I can think of is the 20t Salsa ring. Anyway, it's worth trying a different 20t to see what happens. BTW, what 20t are you running? I'm thinking of going to a 20t Cycle Dynamics Ti or maybe. Salsa also has a new 20t "Pro" granny ring that might be worth a look. I'm not aware of too many others.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  37. #37
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    20t...

    Quote Originally Posted by Axis II
    Duckman thinks it may have to do with the Salsa 20t ring being too wide that we both use. I dunno, but he may be correct but I'm kinda skeptical. The last time I posted my drivetrain setup on the Weight Weenies MTB forum I was ridiculed for using a 20t granny for just these reasons so I know others out there have experienced problems too. You prolly know what my setup is: RF Next LP, Salsa 20t, SS 32, SS42, SRAM Hollow pin chain, AC ISIS 113mm, DA 12/27, DA RD. The chainline is spot on and I check my chain for stretch religiously so the only thing I can think of is the 20t Salsa ring. Anyway, it's worth trying a different 20t to see what happens. BTW, what 20t are you running? I'm thinking of going to a 20t Cycle Dynamics Ti or maybe. Salsa also has a new 20t "Pro" granny ring that might be worth a look. I'm not aware of too many others.
    i used a 20t from Avitar for the last couple of seasons (!). i rarely ever need the granny anyway. it's kind of my "rescue-ring" in case i suffer or when i go slow with my friends.

    there's also Tune or Carbon-Ti offering Titanium granny rings. i use a very light aluminium one from germany.

    pictured below a 22t Tune/Carbon-Ti titanium chainring, the same is also available in 20t (18g) and my aluminium 20t (8,8g).
    Attached Images Attached Images

  38. #38
    SUBLIM8er
    Reputation: Axis II's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,203
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i used a 20t from Avitar for the last couple of seasons (!). i rarely ever need the granny anyway. it's kind of my "rescue-ring" in case i suffer or when i go slow with my friends.

    there's also Tune or Carbon-Ti offering Titanium granny rings. i use a very light aluminium one from germany.

    pictured below a 22t Tune/Carbon-Ti titanium chainring, the same is also available in 20t (18g) and my aluminium 20t (8,8g).
    Thanks. I do end up using my granny relatively often in race situations and on one particular training ride I do that basically has a 1/4km "wall." In race situations, as Duckman has reported, you sometimes need to get into the granny fast and under heavy pedaling load when a hill or steep climb takes you by suprise. This is where the dropped chains and chain suck typically occur for me. This is a bad situation in a race.
    Every man has inside himself a parasitic being who is acting not at all to his advantage.
    William S. Burroughs

  39. #39
    I love Pisgah
    Reputation: Duckman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,407
    And if it was the chainline or whatever..wouldn't it be doing it with the 22t as well, right? And both bikes did the same thing with the Salsa 20t's. And now both bikes are flawless with just a granny ring swap with nothing else being touched.

    I just got back from a grueling preride to next weeks sufferfest(Firewater 50 with 7700' climbing over 47 miles). I did 5200' vertical over 37 miles, and my granny was my friend today.. Not one hint of missed, dropped, sucked, slow, or whatever shifting today while going to the granny. Like a completely different bike with just a granny ring change. Didn't adjust anything else. Nada. One 1.8 mile section today gained 1500' by itself, and is a friggin boulder field for most of that. Yes I climbed it all but for one dab.

    I'm tired.

    The Salsa 20t next to a Kooka 22t.


Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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