Big travel 27.5 that still fits a 2x?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,437

    Big travel 27.5 that still fits a 2x?

    Are there any current big travel 27" bikes that fit a 2x drivetrain?
    Owner of www.shockcraft.co.nz, Mech Engineer, Tuner, Manitou, Motorex, Vorsprung EPTC, SKF, Enduro
    www.dougal.co.nz

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    802
    Knolly Warden

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,510
    I guess that means the Delirium does too?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,437
    Well those are interesting options. The only thing I don't like is the 157mm rear hub. Just means a new rear wheel.
    Owner of www.shockcraft.co.nz, Mech Engineer, Tuner, Manitou, Motorex, Vorsprung EPTC, SKF, Enduro
    www.dougal.co.nz

  5. #5
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
    Well those are interesting options. The only thing I don't like is the 157mm rear hub. Just means a new rear wheel.
    A substantially better wheel. That sucks.


    I was a 2x holdout too, but with 7100/8100 i don't see much value in that any more. You can get ample range, sensible gearing jumps, a good splined alloy freehub (no gouging! ), and a quality cassette for reasonable $. And shimano quality. The remaining 2x advantages are really only apparent on an XC bike.

    I'm a hub destroyer and i'm pretty stoked on the new shimano hubs so far, and they're cheap.


    Sorry to derail your thread, no need to reply to this. I'm curious about the answers too.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,437
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    A substantially better wheel. That sucks.


    I was a 2x holdout too, but with 7100/8100 i don't see much value in that any more. You can get ample range, sensible gearing jumps, a good splined alloy freehub (no gouging! ), and a quality cassette for reasonable $. And shimano quality. The remaining 2x advantages are really only apparent on an XC bike.

    I'm a hub destroyer and i'm pretty stoked on the new shimano hubs so far, and they're cheap.


    Sorry to derail your thread, no need to reply to this. I'm curious about the answers too.
    I'm actually a 3x holdout. There is no downside to more gears and it's a fantastic conversation starter.
    I went from SRAM 1x11 to Shimano 3x10 ( a mix of XT M8000 and earlier) and couldn't be happier. I'll be on 3x11 when I can wear out the rear cluster. I did not like anything about the SRAM drivetrain.

    It's the top end that is missing on all the 1x groupsets and being able to keep a straighter chainline makes it run a lot smoother too.

    My pet theory is 1x bikes are necessary now because the average person can't drive a manual vehicle and can't think around having more than one gear lever.

    I don't need a new bike anytime soon, but I like to plan ahead.
    Owner of www.shockcraft.co.nz, Mech Engineer, Tuner, Manitou, Motorex, Vorsprung EPTC, SKF, Enduro
    www.dougal.co.nz

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
    I'm actually a 3x holdout. There is no downside to more gears and it's a fantastic conversation starter.
    I went from SRAM 1x11 to Shimano 3x10 ( a mix of XT M8000 and earlier) and couldn't be happier. I'll be on 3x11 when I can wear out the rear cluster. I did not like anything about the SRAM drivetrain.

    It's the top end that is missing on all the 1x groupsets and being able to keep a straighter chainline makes it run a lot smoother too.

    My pet theory is 1x bikes are necessary now because the average person can't drive a manual vehicle and can't think around having more than one gear lever.

    I don't need a new bike anytime soon, but I like to plan ahead.
    I like 3x too. I live in the middle ring 80% of my riding, drop to the granny uphill when needed and generally just use the big ring on the road ride to and from the trailhead. Have 1x on my Remedy but would be just as happy with the old traditional 3x.
    2013 Scott Scale 970 (Reba fork)
    2014 Trek Fuel Ex 8 (with added RS dropper post)
    2019 Trek Remedy 8

  8. #8
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
    I'm actually a 3x holdout. There is no downside to more gears and it's a fantastic conversation starter.
    I went from SRAM 1x11 to Shimano 3x10 ( a mix of XT M8000 and earlier) and couldn't be happier. I'll be on 3x11 when I can wear out the rear cluster. I did not like anything about the SRAM drivetrain.

    It's the top end that is missing on all the 1x groupsets and being able to keep a straighter chainline makes it run a lot smoother too.

    My pet theory is 1x bikes are necessary now because the average person can't drive a manual vehicle and can't think around having more than one gear lever.

    I don't need a new bike anytime soon, but I like to plan ahead.
    Best response ever. I love it.

    I was happy to ditch 3x because that 40+ big ring always seemed to get hung up on stuff, and i worried about it savaging my leg. Bashrings were rare. 2x with like 16t jump was just awkward. I love a 26-34 2x set up. Tons of cogs, plenty of range, great form factor, never need to do a FD shift unless you wanna.

    Mostly agreed on the MT comparison, but i think it was further hampered by riders never being encouraged to find the optimal front rings for their application. 2x is just better, if you can optimize it as such.

    Are you running a clutch RD? I can't imagine going without. Tell me about your 3x! Pics?
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,652
    My daily driver is MT and have been forever, as is my garage queen. Going retro doesn't equal any sort of superiority.

    Been ditching the 3rd ring for over 20 years since it was useless except on pavement, which I don't tend to ride. 1x is great; can't say I have any need for a granny ring with the ranges currently available. Maybe if I start bikepacking again. Otherwise, got no need for it.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    777
    how is the chain supposed to stay on if youre using all the travel? Even in the old days before big cassettes people had to run 1x with a chain tensioner on long travel bikes. A long travel bike with a front derailleur sounds like bad bike design since the drivetrain would be incompatible with the intended use of the bike.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,437
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    Best response ever. I love it.

    I was happy to ditch 3x because that 40+ big ring always seemed to get hung up on stuff, and i worried about it savaging my leg. Bashrings were rare. 2x with like 16t jump was just awkward. I love a 26-34 2x set up. Tons of cogs, plenty of range, great form factor, never need to do a FD shift unless you wanna.

    Mostly agreed on the MT comparison, but i think it was further hampered by riders never being encouraged to find the optimal front rings for their application. 2x is just better, if you can optimize it as such.

    Are you running a clutch RD? I can't imagine going without. Tell me about your 3x! Pics?
    Yes clutch derailleur. I have grazed the front chainring on about 3 rocks total in the last 4 years. Cranks are closer to the rear wheel than they used to be so rampover isn't the problem it used to be. I used to hit my big chainring a lot more often 15 years ago.

    Some shots from instagram:
    https://www.instagram.com/p/B1LdTyRHGRf/
    https://www.instagram.com/p/By1ZilYHMlK/
    https://www.instagram.com/p/BsjSowpFFgT/
    https://www.instagram.com/p/BrKHo3aFMjx/

    It's a Bergamont Encore Team, 165mm rear travel and for a while I was running a custom rear shock with a bit over 170mm.

    22-30-40T crank and 11-36 cassette. I only use the granny for those times when I'm out of gas, anything I can ride up I can ride up in the middle ring. It's the big ring that I really like. Wanted to run 44T but wasn't sure I could make it work with this direct mount front derailleur.

    Some of those shots show an old Deore 3x crank. I bent an XT crank last season and it took a while to get it replaced.

    This bike had 30T front and 10-42T rear with 165mm cranks on it when I bought it. Interestingly 30-36T on 175mm cranks is easier to climb with than 30-42T with 165mm cranks.

    I didn't like the gear steps, grinding noise and lack of top-end with the SRAM 1x.

    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    My daily driver is MT and have been forever, as is my garage queen. Going retro doesn't equal any sort of superiority.

    Been ditching the 3rd ring for over 20 years since it was useless except on pavement, which I don't tend to ride. 1x is great; can't say I have any need for a granny ring with the ranges currently available. Maybe if I start bikepacking again. Otherwise, got no need for it.
    It's not the granny that I miss. It's the top-end. Interestingly the mates who run 1x all end up in the big ring when they borrow my bike.

    1x I'm in the top 2 gears (which have a horrible 20% jump) anytime the trail is level. Spending all the time on one or the other end of that cassette where it grumbles, wears fast and feels horrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by idividebyzero View Post
    how is the chain supposed to stay on if youre using all the travel? Even in the old days before big cassettes people had to run 1x with a chain tensioner on long travel bikes. A long travel bike with a front derailleur sounds like bad bike design since the drivetrain would be incompatible with the intended use of the bike.
    Clutch derailleur on the back and the front derailleur keeps the chain headed onto the right ring at the front. I have about the same number of chain drops as the 1x riders I ride with. Except I can just click the shifter and kick the pedals to put it back on.

    This bike was designed to take a front derailleur with 165mm. It was probably intended for 2x, but 3x is better.

    But because my day job is suspension I need to look towards a new bike which takes a metric shock. That is the only reason I'm looking.

    As for big travel and front derailleurs not working. I disagree totally. I even had a Bighit with 8" rear travel and 2x front for a while.
    Owner of www.shockcraft.co.nz, Mech Engineer, Tuner, Manitou, Motorex, Vorsprung EPTC, SKF, Enduro
    www.dougal.co.nz

  12. #12
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    2,004
    Well...if you can't find the bike/frame you want for 2x and long travel, you can always just get one without the front derailleur. Manually take off the chain and put it on the smaller chainring at the bottom of a long climb, then back on the big chainring at the top. Need to release the clutch of course. I did that for a year and it was fine (besides chain drops but that's a different story --- 9-speed RD didn't have a clutch). Just got that crankset back from the bike shop yesterday and they took off the smaller chainring, said it's 'not compatible' with my 11-speed setup. Oh well, I didn't bitch at them, I'll just have to work harder climbing.

  13. #13
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    541
    How big are you talking? The HD4 and latest Mach 6 version has 152-155mm of travel and takes a 2x.
    The 2017-19 Cube Stereo 160, but the geo is a bit odd.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-07-2017, 11:40 PM
  2. XTR 2x Vs XT Di2 2x ??
    By Rattus in forum Drivetrain - shifters, derailleurs, cranks
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-23-2017, 01:49 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-19-2013, 08:40 AM
  4. 2x niners/2x 29er's
    By bert-prologue in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 12:15 AM

Members who have read this thread: 74

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.