Yet Another Cycling Forum

General Category => The Knowledge => Topic started by: alexb on December 02, 2019, 04:19:57 pm

Title: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: alexb on December 02, 2019, 04:19:57 pm
I'm so tired of seeing people trying to figure out ever more ridiculous ways to come up with a gear arrangement in a 1x n gearing arrangement that works for particular niche types of riding.

I guess I was most infuriated by a recent piece on the Path Less Pedalled youtube channel where Russ is fitting an 11-50t 12speed sprocket to a bike in order to give him a decent spread of gears.

A back of the envelope calculation, confirmed by a bit of tapping numbers into Sheldon Brown's gear calculator, suggested he could achieve what he wants with a nice 10 speed triple and cheap and cheerful Shimano MTB or even long cage road derailleurs. Maybe involving a J-Tek problem solver to handle the gear shifter incompatibility between Shimano's road and MTB shifters.

Anyway, it's one of the reasons why I run Campagnolo on my bike, because I can run a Campag triple with 10 speed rear to give me 30 speeds with all the usual overlaps and redundancies. However, it's cheap, reliable and it works. The only annoyance is that 10 speed only allows for a 13-29 rear cassette. Sometimes I'd like a little broader spread of gears...

I was absent-mindedly thinking that I could by an 11 speed right shifter from Campagnolo, and run 33 speeds by installing an 11 speed cassette on my existing wheel and replacing the chain and rear mech. This is still cheaper than buying one of the crazy expensive 11-50 cassettes that have crept onto the market (although the Sunrace models are surprisingly cheap).

An alternative would be to swap my rear cassette carrier for Shimano, add a J-tek shift-mate and a 10 speed Shimano MTB cassette.

It's fun to think these things through and Campagnolo triples are still a possibility in their 10 speed range and widely available.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: DuncanM on December 02, 2019, 04:26:48 pm
I'm anti-1x because it's expensive, so I run Campag! :) Have you seen how much decent Campag stuff is new these days?
11-50 is MTB gearing, and they have good reasons for avoiding front mechs and triples (eg mud, ground clearance, ratchet rear mechs to avoid chainslap).
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on December 02, 2019, 04:30:50 pm
It is all a bit mad, IMO.

26,36,46 up front, and your choice of 8 on the back was pretty optimum for general riding (touring, commuting and audax).

Marketing just messed it up from then on.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: alexb on December 02, 2019, 04:53:09 pm
The fact that these ever larger cassettes require a new bottom bracket design and a new rear hub design to accommodate their various driveline failings suggests it's not the optimum solution.

I raced mountain bikes for 15 years with minimalr (real) problems with mud clogging etc.
Today's newer rear mechs with in-built clutches have solved chain slap as I understand it, but newer derailleurs are just better than past designs.

as for Campagnolo pricing - Campag Ergos are cheaper than the Shimano equivalents in almost every case and they last ages and can be repaired.
Campag rear mechs seem about equivalent in price to Shimano, and my rear hub can accept either Campagnolo or Shimano cassettes.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: grams on December 02, 2019, 05:00:46 pm
We’re pretending fitting, fettling and wrangling a triple costs nothing and has no downsides are we?
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on December 02, 2019, 05:12:07 pm
We’re pretending fitting, fettling and wrangling a triple costs nothing and has no downsides are we?

I never had any issues with the setup on my mercian.

Only thing I had to watch for was that the 26 ring was not used much, so the chain could get worn, wear in with the 36/46, then it would skip when used on the 26. That is just poor maintenance and me being a cheapskate not replacing the chain on time.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: DuncanM on December 02, 2019, 05:23:17 pm
Today's newer rear mechs with in-built clutches have solved chain slap as I understand it, but newer derailleurs are just better than past designs.
Some of those designs actively preclude having a front mech.
Quote
as for Campagnolo pricing - Campag Ergos are cheaper than the Shimano equivalents in almost every case and they last ages and can be repaired.
Campag rear mechs seem about equivalent in price to Shimano, and my rear hub can accept either Campagnolo or Shimano cassettes.
Maybe it's just about volume discounts, but I've been looking at the groupset prices for a while, and for a regular groupset, Chorus is as close to Dura Ace (or SRAM Red) as it is to Ultegra. That applies on the way down too, and obviously Record is off on another planet.

I just think it's about picking the right tool for the job. 1x works on CX bikes, and for certain iterations of MTB. No road racing team has made it work, and it clearly failed with Aqua Blue and contributed to the demise of the team. Unless you are earning a living from your results, where's the harm in experimenting though?
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Kim on December 02, 2019, 05:38:47 pm
I tend to think of 1x as a poor person's hub gear.  Which is sometimes a legitimate choice.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: phil w on December 02, 2019, 06:20:07 pm
I love triples but then I've run them since 1995, first on a mtn bike. Never had an issue with them and mud. On the recumbent in rolling terrain shifting between the big ring and middle ring can provide the perfect gear change between downhill and uphill, without needing to change cogs at the back.

I got a 10 speed double racer in 1984 before that. Before 1984 my bikes were all single speed apart from a 3 speed sturmey archer ladies bike my dad got me second hand in the late 70's.

Never had a problem with my triples, a bit of trimming at times, but now I have returned to friction shifters that's all in the past, and shifts are as smooth as anything..
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: alexb on December 02, 2019, 06:40:55 pm
I tend to think of 1x as a poor person's hub gear.  Which is sometimes a legitimate choice.

I have an 8 speed hub gear on the commuter. It's perfect for that application, but underlies one reviewers take on the Alfine at the time, "8 "wrong" gears" and I tend to agree.
compared to my proper bike, being able to find the perfect cadence by shifting up or down a bit is sublime.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: bhoot on December 02, 2019, 07:03:39 pm
An alternative would be to swap my rear cassette carrier for Shimano, add a J-tek shift-mate and a 10 speed Shimano MTB cassette.
Or possibly a Shimano 9 speed (eg 12-32) and go Shimergo with no J-tek?  Not sure whether that depends on having old Campag 10 speed shifters, but works for me with my old Daytona 10 speed ergos.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Morat on December 02, 2019, 07:15:25 pm
3x8 XT and Suntour XC Pro thumbies. If you do manage to stuff it up, there's still a friction option. I wish a thousand papercuts on the scrote who stole that bike :(
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mattc on December 02, 2019, 07:59:35 pm
We’re pretending fitting, fettling and wrangling a triple costs nothing and has no downsides are we?
Cor snot!

But they do mostly work reliably, and you can always limp home on the middle ring if necessary. Friction shift helps a LOT - removes 70% of fettling/reliabilty issues and 95% of the cost.

Then consider a 12x1 setup vs 3x5. The latter will be a billion pounds cheaper (ish). And if your rear cable snaps (just for example) you've still got 3 gears over quite a useful range.

( I think its folks on a modest budget that have most to lose by going 1x. )
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on December 02, 2019, 08:27:22 pm
I've never tried a 1x. Obviously (is it really obvious?) I've had bikes with single chainrings, but they've either been singlespeed or had hub gears. So I won't comment on 1x in the modern sense, except (ah ha!) to say:
I think multiple chainrings are best avoided for small children;
Whatever you think of the suitability of 1x for you, it's pretty unexcellent to get out the hates on those who do think it's good for them.

Edit: Hate was too strong a word, but there's a definite element of belittling and "it doesn't work for me so how can it work for you?"
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mzjo on December 02, 2019, 09:33:23 pm
I've never tried a 1x. Obviously (is it really obvious?) I've had bikes with single chainrings, but they've either been singlespeed or had hub gears. So I won't comment on 1x in the modern sense, except (ah ha!) to say:
I think multiple chainrings are best avoided for small children;
Whatever you think of the suitability of 1x for you, it's pretty unexcellent to get out the hates on those who do think it's good for them.

I had a budget recycled MBSO on which I had a bit of fun with 1x7. 32t ring and 13-30 cassette. I worked out that I was missing one gear at the top, which I could do without, and a couple at the bottom, which was very slightly harder. Only trouble was the chain derailing occasionally in bottom (no Dog Fang).

Then when I tried 46-30 and 46-34 doubles on the road bike I never felt right. 46-30 was the worst, never in the right gear, always cross-chaining. Since they were on cranks for a triple I ended up putting a 28t ring on the 46-34 and an 11-30 8sp cassette, which I don't have any inclination to change (unless it was to go to a 12-32 or 12-34 cassette; I really don't need the 11, it's a bit too high). Don't feel the need for more than 8 on the back.
BITD I had a 44-30 double with a 14-24 5sp freewheel. I thought it was just about perfect. It would be ok now with a 14-28 6sp. I did my first BCMF with 42-30 and a 14-28 5sp freewheel (and almost all of it on the little ring- or so it seemed); the logic was that I would never be overgeared with the 42/14 so didn't have to think too hard about what I was doing to my legs!
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: zigzag on December 02, 2019, 09:40:18 pm
firstly, i find it strange to get infuriated by some random youtuber going about their business. they usually have their own reasons and interests to talk whatever they talk.

regarding 1x - it has it's use, especially for novice riders and mtb'ers. i've used 1x many years ago before it was a "thing", mainly for commuting and some audaxes (incl. lel, pbp, mille miglia..), it worked fine.
i've used triples too (still have it on one of my bikes which i barely use) - they also work fine when set up properly, though uncool these days, if that's a concern. 8)
the bikes i ride the most now have either a double setup or single speed.

for me - more choice and more options is always welcome.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 02, 2019, 09:47:13 pm
The problem is that new popular stuff drives out older useful stuff. Witness the dying throes of the triple changers. Other than a couple of low-end STI-power options, you are stuck with bar-end shifters for drop bars. For things like fast tandems, that is a pain in the arse compared to a wide-range triple chainset. My tandem runs 54-44-26 rings. There aren’t many wide range doubles that match that.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: grams on December 02, 2019, 10:10:42 pm
The complaint about cost seems to be because you're stumbling into the world of high end MTB components, where there's endless appetite for expensive bits. Nothing about that is intrinsic to 1x.

You can do it much more affordably with conventional components - 11x36 and 11x42 don't cost much more than narrower bits. If you're starting with a reasonably wide cassette you can convert for just the cost of a narrow-wide chainring* and delete the front mech.

(* you really don't want to try 1x with a borrowed double/triple chainring and no retention. The short teeth will mean frequent chain droppage on climbs)

I had a 44-30 double with a 14-24 5sp freewheel. I thought it was just about perfect. It would be ok now with a 14-28 6sp.

A quick bit of maths says you can get close to that with a 34 or 36 chainring and an 11-32 cassette, maybe as low as 9 speed. No need to take out a loan for an 11-50.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: grams on December 02, 2019, 10:17:33 pm
Other than a couple of low-end STI-power options

The Tiagra 4703 left shifter is *identical* in construction to the 105 5800 double shifter, which is scarcely different from the 6800 Ultegra. So if you ignore the badges you've still got one modern option in production.

No hydraulic and no road Di2 triples though.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Kim on December 02, 2019, 10:18:52 pm
The problem is that new popular stuff drives out older useful stuff.

Exactly.  Other than that, it's all good.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: zigzag on December 02, 2019, 10:32:34 pm
The problem is that new popular stuff drives out older useful stuff. Witness the dying throes of the triple changers. Other than a couple of low-end STI-power options, you are stuck with bar-end shifters for drop bars. For things like fast tandems, that is a pain in the arse compared to a wide-range triple chainset. My tandem runs 54-44-26 rings. There aren’t many wide range doubles that match that.

racing tandems is hardly a mainstream activity and that's a very niche and out of spec setup; i'd stock up some spare parts while they are available if i was intending to run this in the future.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 02, 2019, 10:37:42 pm
It is a touring tandem, hence the 26t granny ring. Rolling a 54x13 is normal for a strong team on a valley road. The 12t and 11t cogs get used on downhills or going hard but efficiency is a bit lower. Racing tandems use 56-60t big rings if they want to have a gear or two spare for descents.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: bludger on December 02, 2019, 10:41:28 pm
I think if there is going to be a future market for new tandems, the internal gearbox is worth giving a look-in. There's a chap in my LCC group with a pinion gearbox tandem that's also his cargo bike, it's pretty ace. He often rides it just by himself. I'll try to get some pics for the 'odd bikes' thread...
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Adam on December 02, 2019, 11:07:41 pm
The trouble is the 1x "solution" has merely encouraged the arms race up to 12 speed, meaning chains will need replacing even more often.

5 speed chains never seemed to need replacing!
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Jaded on December 02, 2019, 11:13:02 pm
Choice is the key. I’m waiting for four up front.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: LittleWheelsandBig on December 02, 2019, 11:16:24 pm
You missed that quad chainring option already. The Mountain Tamer Quad replaced the granny ring of a triple with a pair of freewheel sprockets back in the days when 8 speed cassettes were new and exciting. http://www.abundantadventures.com/mt_plus.html
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: DuncanM on December 03, 2019, 09:08:51 am
Choice is the key. I’m waiting for four up front.
There are lower end quad chainsets around. They are popular with eg the Atomic Zombie crowd for (ridiculously heavy) trikes because they allow you to pedal yourself up pretty much anything, and pushing one of them would be a herculean task!
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: trekker12 on December 03, 2019, 11:59:27 am
I ride 1x

On my winter commuter I got fed up of having a constant rub on the front derailleur and it getting jammed up with clag through the winter - the slightly knackared shifter didn't help - I had a nearly new Spa cycles Stronglight triple set, stripped it down to the middle ring only, set the remains of the derailleur in the highest position to act as a chain catcher and voila a 1x9 for nothing more than the cost of some shorter chain ring bolts (alright I had at some point in history bought the chainset but cheap single chainsets are available)

It helps I live in fairly flat Suffolk and I only use that bike for the 30 mile round trip to work and back but it's into it's second winter as a 1x9 and I'm not going back.

The nice road bike is a double and the touring bike is triple so I have the complete set :)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Woofage on December 03, 2019, 12:29:58 pm
I've got 1x9 on my "utility" bike. It gives me a good spread of low to middle gears (I'm not bothered that I've lost a couple of long gears; it's not a racing bike). It's low maintenance and was cheap to buy since there are fewer components, and they're not high-end.

I think 1xN gearing has its place for certain applications so why not? My posh bike is 3x10 though...

(My 1x9 setup uses a Shimano 9sp bar-end shifter on a SJS handlebar mount driving a long-cage rear mech (Shimano LX). Up front there's a Stronglight double chainset with 1 (TA  8)) ring on the inner and a bash-ring on the outer. A Dog Fang ensures the chain stays put. I've had this bike for 7 or 8 years now.)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: vorsprung on December 03, 2019, 06:09:14 pm
I have an 8 speed Alfine and a single speed that have 1 at the front

Both are just fine.

I did have 1x9 for a while.  It was Ok, 39 at the front and 11-34 at the back.
I converted that bike to a 38-48 double, just seemed to work better

Surprised no one has mentioned narrow-wide rings yet

Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mike on December 03, 2019, 07:22:17 pm
other ½ has a gravel bike with 1 x 12 setup (Sram) and it's daft - 42 on the front and a 10 - 50 on the back.

Yes, it gives a range from 22 - 120 gear inches but there are massive steps between ratios, it's not designed for touring so will never need a 22 inch and the chainline sounds awful.  For most rides, she uses about 3 gears.  Still quicker than me though :(
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Jurek on December 03, 2019, 07:28:15 pm
other ½ has a gravel bike with 1 x 12 setup (Sram) and it's daft - 42 on the front and a 10 - 50 on the back.

Yes, it gives a range from 22 - 120 gear inches but there are massive steps between ratios, it's not designed for touring so will never need a 22 inch and the chainline sounds awful.  For most rides, she uses about 3 gears.  Still quicker than me though :(
Fast women are desirable  ;)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Kim on December 03, 2019, 07:32:02 pm
Fast women are desirable  ;)

Unlike loose bikes...
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Jurek on December 03, 2019, 07:33:12 pm
Fast women are desirable  ;)

Unlike loose bikes...
:P
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mattc on December 03, 2019, 08:04:50 pm
I can see a T-shirt in the making here ...
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mattc on December 03, 2019, 08:10:48 pm
I just think it's about picking the right tool for the job. 1x works on CX bikes, and for certain iterations of MTB. No road racing team has made it work, and it clearly failed with Aqua Blue and contributed to the demise of the team.

Well yes ... CX really only needs a very modest range. I've got mine setup with a triple for general/touring use, but race in middle-ring
1x10 mode. And I could easily manage with about 6 of those gears. (part of me hopes I smash it up one day, and can replace with an old 531 6-speed. Or a 3x5 of course. Or an SA 3speed ...)

My commuter (based on an old CX frame) is a 1x8. Summat like 42x 12-32? That's fine, with no big hills in my area, and very cheap running costs.  I do a lot of modest touring on it too. But you'd have to GIVE me a 1x12 groupset to make me "upgrade"!
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: perpetual dan on December 03, 2019, 09:55:44 pm
I'm all for the simplest solution to a problem, up until chasing simplicity causes the problem to be redefined to one I don't have. That's pretty much how I feel about 1x. I value flexibility and don't count the front shifter as a great cost or complexity. If I were in the business of turning out bikes at volume to a price, or had a bike dedicated to one use, then my priorities might be different.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Brucey on December 04, 2019, 03:14:58 am
1x has 'advantages' such as (apparently) less complexity and/or less weight.    I've built, owned and used many 1x bikes and they are fine but they always come with compromises too.  The compromises may include;

- fewer gears
- gear ratios further apart
- running bad chainlines more of the time
- chain coming unshipped at the front more often than with a double or triple
- having to use stupid small chainrings and sprockets in your 'flat road' gears if you want to include a low gear in your setup.
- small sprockets wear faster and are less efficient than larger ones
- you may have to use oddball chainrings such as narrow-wide (which are only available with even tooth counts of course)
- you may have to use a RD with a clutch in it
- you may have less choice about the intermediate ratios in your cassette
- you may have gear ratios that are less evenly spaced than with other setups
- all things being equal you are often forced to use a  physically wider cassette at the rear and this makes for a more dished/ weaker rear wheel (or a wider rear hub)
- chainline; this may be forced on you by the (wide?) rear hub and this may have a knock-on in terms of Q values.


The main thing that is 'new' about the current 1x fad is that folk are claiming (because you can get more sprockets and larger/smaller sprockets than before) that 1x is an acceptable substitute for (or even preferable to) alternative double and triple setups.  Well, the 'simplicity' is arguably just  an illusion; it is merely replaced by a different, less obvious form of complexity.  The 'weight advantage' is footling at best and is in most cases completely negated by losses in transmission efficiency;  half a percent loss in efficiency is more than enough to be a worse hit than carrying ~0.5 (or even 1.0) kg extra weight up every hill.   Between chainlines being worse and having to use smaller sprockets more of the time, I would estimate that (on average) most modern 1x setups are at least 0.5% less efficient and many are worse than that.

IMHO if you want to take advantage of modern developments in transmissions and 'build a better bike' a good way of doing it would be to use a significantly narrower freehub body using a shortened 10s or 11s spaced cassette and a double or triple at the front, to give 2x9 or 3x8 gearing.  This would allow a less dished wheel and in turn (for any strength required) the use of a lighter weight rim. Lower 'Q' may also be possible.  Losing weight at the rim/tyre is much more of a big deal than losing it elsewhere on the bike.

So for me the bottom line is that if you understand the true effects of the compromises inherent in any given setup -which IME most people don't, BTW-  then by all means choose whatever floats your boat. But to pretend that any given system is 'always better' than another is (outside of rigidly defined usages) probably wrong; it depends on you envisaged use of the bike as well as your personal preferences.

cheers
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: rogerzilla on December 04, 2019, 06:45:51 am
I run the Moulton as a 1 x 9 when it's not fixed.  The only issue is the chain unshipping, for which various solutions exist (the simplest, as on your old 5-speed racer, is a rear mech with a strong spring).
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: DuncanM on December 04, 2019, 09:28:06 am
So for me the bottom line is that if you understand the true effects of the compromises inherent in any given setup -which IME most people don't, BTW-  then by all means choose whatever floats your boat. But to pretend that any given system is 'always better' than another is (outside of rigidly defined usages) probably wrong; it depends on you envisaged use of the bike as well as your personal preferences.

That bit I 100% agree with.

FWIW, I found that my chain came unshipped much more running 3x than 1x (narrow wide) when doing CX. Every time you jump back on and discover you are in the smallest chainring you lose time/places. But I guess most cycling doesn't involve jumping of the bike throwing it over stuff and then jumping back on again! :)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: grams on December 04, 2019, 09:49:23 am
Yeah, the idea of assigning "chain comes off less often" to doubles/triples is, erm, interesting.

(looking forward to 10 paragraphs of measures to take to set up a front derailleur so the chain never comes off, followed by a claim that front derailleurs also don't need endless fettling to work properly...)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Feanor on December 04, 2019, 09:52:54 am
[...] followed by a claim that front derailleurs also don't need endless fettling to work properly...)

None of my front derailleurs need endless fettling to work properly.
In fact, I  can't remember fettling them at all after initial set-up.
<shrug>
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: ElyDave on December 04, 2019, 10:34:55 am
[...] followed by a claim that front derailleurs also don't need endless fettling to work properly...)

None of my front derailleurs need endless fettling to work properly.
In fact, I  can't remember fettling them at all after initial set-up.
<shrug>

+1, set them up properly and they work, whether double or triple

the Tiagra triple shifter on my Giant is still going strong 14+ years later.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: hatler on December 04, 2019, 11:38:43 am
[...] followed by a claim that front derailleurs also don't need endless fettling to work properly...)

None of my front derailleurs need endless fettling to work properly.
In fact, I  can't remember fettling them at all after initial set-up.
<shrug>
Snap. 28,000 miles in and I suspect that the only component I have never touched on the bike (fitted with a triple) is the FD.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: hatler on December 04, 2019, 11:39:44 am
[...] followed by a claim that front derailleurs also don't need endless fettling to work properly...)

None of my front derailleurs need endless fettling to work properly.
In fact, I  can't remember fettling them at all after initial set-up.
<shrug>
Snap. 28,000 miles in and I suspect that the only component I have never touched on the bike (fitted with a triple) is the FD.
Oooo. And it's never shipped the chain.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: zigzag on December 04, 2019, 11:48:54 am
Yeah, the idea of assigning "chain comes off less often" to doubles/triples is, erm, interesting.

(looking forward to 10 paragraphs of measures to take to set up a front derailleur so the chain never comes off, followed by a claim that front derailleurs also don't need endless fettling to work properly...)

it's just a lack of skill setting it up. if the derailleur is set up as it should be, and there is a chain catcher installed for insurance, the chain should never come off. unless i change a chainset, i don't need to fiddle with the fd at all.
you need some common sense and mechanical sympathy for it to function properly though (i.e. avoid shifting at low cadence and high torque etc.)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 04, 2019, 12:39:28 pm
It is all a bit mad, IMO.

26,36,46 up front, and your choice of 8 on the back was pretty optimum for general riding (touring, commuting and audax).

Marketing just messed it up from then on.

I'm not so sure I'd agree.

The biggest 8 speed cassette I can find is an 11-34. That means a ratio of 1.31 for your lowest gear, and 4.18 at the top. Or 1.6 MOD -> 8.9MOD. At 90RPM the top speed would be 47.8kph. At 60rpm on a hill in bottom gear you'd get 5.8kph.

Conversely, my 28/38 front and 11-40 rear cassette gives you:

1.5MOD -> 7.4MOD. Which is a 60rpm climber of 5.3kph and a 90rpm top speed of 39.5kph.

For a touring setup, I'd have to ask the question. When are you going to be actively in need of pedalling faster than 40kph? If it's going down hill, enjoy the leg rest, it's a tour afterall. With the 3x8 you have the mental load of making sure that you use the right combo of chain ring and sprocket at any given time. The 11-34 8 speed cassette has 11-13-15-17-20-23-26-34, but your 26 is best with the 23,26,34, the 36 with the 23,20,17,15, and the 46 with the 11,13,15. The range is ok, but you actually only have 10 usable gears. Conversely with my 2x11, the big ring works with all 11 gears, whilst the small ring is ok with the bottom 4 gears, Giving me 15 options. My di2 also offloads all of this processing...

Now, if I was to make this a 1x11 setup, my choice of front chain ring would require me to lose something either at the top end, or the bottom end. If I was to use just one of my chainrings, that would give me either a new top speed of 29.1kph, or a new low speed of 7.2kph.

Some might say that a 38/40 bottom gear is plenty, they are also the sort that say that a 1:1 is plenty for anyone.

And this is where I'm going to get all radical and start annoying people with my standard rant about the shitness of gearing on off the shelf bikes.

The sting has been taken out of the rant a little by the arrival of shimano's 30/46 GRX chainsets, this makes for a much more sensible  offerings, except for the fact that the largest cassette they offer in a 2x11 setup is 11-34. So the lowest gear is 1.13 or 1.9MOD. This is the point where a man will tell me that this is plenty low enough for anybody. Noone needs a lower gear on the road etc...

To which I call bullshit. I'm sure most men can start off with a bike with a 1:1 lowest gear, and will get up most hills etc...
But for any woman new to cycling, who's just bought a bike and wants to start riding, this gear is going to be too low for all but the shortest of hills. If we want cycling to be accessible to all, we need to get away from the elitist bullshit. GRX is a good start for this, but IMHO the 1x options still do not give enough range for most people, with too large a steps, and the 2x11 options really need to allow for bigger cassettes within spec*.

Your average human, of any gender, should be able to walk into a bike shop with €1000 in cash, and walk out with a bike that fits them, that they can ride up most stuff. Sure they might be slow, they may have to walk the 10%+ stuff, but right now, that's very hard with of the shelf bikes, and the 1x stuff doesn't make it any easier.

There is no right answer, but some answers are more wrong than others...

J

*I've seen people claim that they can get an 11-40 to work with the RX815 or RX817 rear mech, and I've heard similar about it working with the ultegra rear mech. But it's without the spec, and may not work for everyone...
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Gattopardo on December 04, 2019, 12:52:49 pm
I tend to think of 1x as a poor person's hub gear.  Which is sometimes a legitimate choice.

Sturmey archer 3 speed is all you need.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 04, 2019, 12:56:30 pm
Sturmey archer 3 speed is all you need.

Please fit this to your bike, and come join me for the Ardennes trip Dutch Audax in July*. Would love to see someone do that on a Sturmey archer 3 speed.

J

* https://www.randonneurs.nl/brevet/brm-200-heerlen/
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Gattopardo on December 04, 2019, 01:08:19 pm
Sturmey archer 3 speed is all you need.

Please fit this to your bike, and come join me for the Ardennes trip Dutch Audax in July*. Would love to see someone do that on a Sturmey archer 3 speed.

J

* https://www.randonneurs.nl/brevet/brm-200-heerlen/

Have the 3 speed on a brompton, on a raleigh cameo and looking a building 3 speed with back pedal brake.

Looking at that elevation, are there any riders doing the audax fixed?

I'm so unfit I doubt I could do that audax on a motorbike.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on December 04, 2019, 01:17:10 pm
It is all a bit mad, IMO.

26,36,46 up front, and your choice of 8 on the back was pretty optimum for general riding (touring, commuting and audax).

Marketing just messed it up from then on.

I'm not so sure I'd agree.

The biggest 8 speed cassette I can find is an 11-34. That means a ratio of 1.31 for your lowest gear, and 4.18 at the top. Or 1.6 MOD -> 8.9MOD. At 90RPM the top speed would be 47.8kph. At 60rpm on a hill in bottom gear you'd get 5.8kph.

Conversely, my 28/38 front and 11-40 rear cassette gives you:

1.5MOD -> 7.4MOD. Which is a 60rpm climber of 5.3kph and a 90rpm top speed of 39.5kph.

...

trimmed the details.

I agree that your 28/38 front and 11-40 rear setup is superior for most touring.

I used to commute and regularly exceeded 40kph when drafting, on gentle downhills or with a following wind - but then, that is a niche type of cycling (and I couldn't do it now).

What derailleurs and shifters are you using? My current bike is a double with tiagra and I would prefer lower gears at the bottom end for the very rare occasions when I go camping. Don't have the legs for getting a load up a hill with sub 1:1 ratios any more, would prefer something like your setup.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Gattopardo on December 04, 2019, 01:26:41 pm
As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 04, 2019, 01:45:39 pm

trimmed the details.

I agree that your 28/38 front and 11-40 rear setup is superior for most touring.

I used to commute and regularly exceeded 40kph when drafting, on gentle downhills or with a following wind - but then, that is a niche type of cycling (and I couldn't do it now).

What derailleurs and shifters are you using? My current bike is a double with tiagra and I would prefer lower gears at the bottom end for the very rare occasions when I go camping. Don't have the legs for getting a load up a hill with sub 1:1 ratios any more, would prefer something like your setup.

I have a M8050 Di2 Rear mech, and the M8070 Front mech. I went Di2 because I wanted to be able to shift from the aero bars. I have to say di2 has been a fantastic upgrade. I love it. I'm gonna save up and get a set of climbing shifters too.

As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.

Hard to gauge as I don't generally clean a chain, just keep adding more lube. I got ~3000km from my first 11 speed chain, and would get about ~4500km from a 10 speed chain. The chains in question being KMC X11sl and X10sl. Is the chain life a bit low because I don't clean them properly, or is it low because of the inherent design restrictions of 11 speed? Hard to say. Chains are replaced at 0.5% stretch on the 11 speed, and 0.75% stretch on the 10 speed.

Sturmey archer 3 speed is all you need.

Please fit this to your bike, and come join me for the Ardennes trip Dutch Audax in July*. Would love to see someone do that on a Sturmey archer 3 speed.

J

* https://www.randonneurs.nl/brevet/brm-200-heerlen/

Have the 3 speed on a brompton, on a raleigh cameo and looking a building 3 speed with back pedal brake.

Looking at that elevation, are there any riders doing the audax fixed?

I'm so unfit I doubt I could do that audax on a motorbike.

Then by your own words, a 3 speed sturmey archer isn't all you need, else you would be able to do that ride on it.

J
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: grams on December 04, 2019, 02:04:35 pm
*I've seen people claim that they can get an 11-40 to work with the RX815 or RX817 rear mech, and I've heard similar about it working with the ultegra rear mech. But it's without the spec, and may not work for everyone...

My RX805* didn't seem happy with an 11-42 at least in my brief testing. The RX817 is only specced for 1x use. No idea if it refuses to work when an FD is added to the system or not.

(* "Ultegra RX", which is extremely similar to the RX815)

Please fit this to your bike, and come join me for the Ardennes trip Dutch Audax in July*. Would love to see someone do that on a Sturmey archer 3 speed.

I've been up some of those hills on a Sturmey Archer 3 speed. A 2x2x3 speed, but still a 3 speed.

Alas I'll be dicking about in Scotland that weekend.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mrcharly-YHT on December 04, 2019, 03:18:45 pm
Apropos of nothing, I used to commute from a hill above Holmfirth, through Holmfirth, over Saddleworth moor to Greenfield on a 3-speed SA. One gear for going uphill. One for the flat/cruising. One for downhill or a following wind.

Didn't have a camping load, just commuting gear.   
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: pumpkin on December 04, 2019, 03:28:40 pm
I quite like the idea of 1x. At this stage of the game I have a feeling that having 38 up front with 11-28/30/32 would poss work quite well compared to my 46/36 with 12/27 or 13/26 setups the top ends of which I v.rarely use.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Carlosfandango on December 04, 2019, 07:42:21 pm
As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.

Apparently modern chains do last longer. I've recently read a write up of tests where both Shimano and SRAM 12 speed chains last twice as long as 9 speed and cheap 10 and 11 speed  KMC chains.  :o

Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: ElyDave on December 04, 2019, 07:44:27 pm
At 5.3 kmh, most people would be quicker to get off and walk
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Kim on December 04, 2019, 07:59:36 pm
At 5.3 kmh, most people would be quicker to get off and walk

Assuming the cycle's practically pushable, and they aren't going to destroy their cleats or whatever by doing so.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mattc on December 04, 2019, 08:03:27 pm
I think riders can overestimate how fast they can push bikes up v-steep hills; that's where these comparisons tend to go wrong.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Brucey on December 04, 2019, 08:25:25 pm
in an early edition of 'bicycling science' there is some data which suggests that once you hit a certain gradient, it might be better to get off and walk. However Chris Juden pointed out to me that in that study, they hadn't had access to the very lowest gear ratios, so this, rather than the gradient per se was the thing that limits the speed at which you can still ride comfortably. He contended that  -provided you have suitably low gear ratios-  you are still better off riding your bike than pushing it, even when you are riding up a very steep gradient at speeds that are well  below normal walking pace. 

cheers
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on December 04, 2019, 08:27:34 pm
Agree-ish with Matt. I don't think pushing would actually be faster but I don't think there'd be much in it either way. I do think your legs might benefit from walking if it's a steep hill on a long ride, it's good to give them a change of action.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: andrew_s on December 04, 2019, 08:50:32 pm
Last time I checked (Crowcombe Hill, Quantocks), I was pushing a loaded touring bike at 3 kph where I'd been pedaling at 4.5 to 5 kph (until I tried to shake a drop of sweat off my eyelash before it got in my eye, and lost my balance)

The biggest 8 speed cassette I can find is an 11-34.
11-40 8 speed here (https://pedalbits.net/collections/cassettes-1/products/sunrace-cs-ms6-8-speed-wide-ratio-11-40t-mountain-bike-cassette-silver)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Gattopardo on December 04, 2019, 08:52:33 pm


Then by your own words, a 3 speed sturmey archer isn't all you need, else you would be able to do that ride on it.

J

Suspect alot is being lost in my humour, I could not do that even on a motorbike.   

Do you think that there will there will be some people doing it with a fixed gear?

As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.

Hard to gauge as I don't generally clean a chain, just keep adding more lube. I got ~3000km from my first 11 speed chain, and would get about ~4500km from a 10 speed chain. The chains in question being KMC X11sl and X10sl. Is the chain life a bit low because I don't clean them properly, or is it low because of the inherent design restrictions of 11 speed? Hard to say. Chains are replaced at 0.5% stretch on the 11 speed, and 0.75% stretch on the 10 speed.

Do you rotate three chains to keep the the cassette life or one chain then another.

Being nosey as I'm thinking of going 1x9 or 1x10 on the mountain bike.

As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.

Apparently modern chains do last longer. I've recently read a write up of tests where both Shimano and SRAM 12 speed chains last twice as long as 9 speed and cheap 10 and 11 speed  KMC chains.  :o



Wonder how that happens, different materials for the chain?
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: perpetual dan on December 04, 2019, 09:10:32 pm
...
With the 3x8 you have the mental load of making sure that you use the right combo of chain ring and sprocket at any given time.
...
The 11-34 8 speed cassette has 11-13-15-17-20-23-26-34, but your 26 is best with the 23,26,34, the 36 with the 23,20,17,15, and the 46 with the 11,13,15. The range is ok, but you actually only have 10 usable gears. Conversely with my 2x11, the big ring works with all 11 gears, whilst the small ring is ok with the bottom 4 gears, Giving me 15 options. My di2 also offloads all of this processing...

I've never found the mental load all that great - I tend to treat the chainrings as broad categories.

When I used to have 8 speed (a couple of weeks ago) I probably used more than 4 gears in the middle and large chainrings too. Which seems like a fairer comparison than "is best with" vs "works with". But that's splitting hairs.

...
And this is where I'm going to get all radical and start annoying people with my standard rant about the shitness of gearing on off the shelf bikes.
...

I, for one, agree. Emulating pro racers doesn't really work for me.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: ElyDave on December 04, 2019, 09:40:59 pm
I think riders can overestimate how fast they can push bikes up v-steep hills; that's where these comparisons tend to go wrong.

I think riders overestimate their ability to stay upright on a bicycle uphill at stupidly low speeds.

BTDTGTTS, I pushed the bike
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mzjo on December 04, 2019, 11:17:02 pm
...
With the 3x8 you have the mental load of making sure that you use the right combo of chain ring and sprocket at any given time.
...
The 11-34 8 speed cassette has 11-13-15-17-20-23-26-34, but your 26 is best with the 23,26,34, the 36 with the 23,20,17,15, and the 46 with the 11,13,15. The range is ok, but you actually only have 10 usable gears. Conversely with my 2x11, the big ring works with all 11 gears, whilst the small ring is ok with the bottom 4 gears, Giving me 15 options. My di2 also offloads all of this processing...

I've never found the mental load all that great - I tend to treat the chainrings as broad categories.

When I used to have 8 speed (a couple of weeks ago) I probably used more than 4 gears in the middle and large chainrings too. Which seems like a fairer comparison than "is best with" vs "works with". But that's splitting hairs.

...
And this is where I'm going to get all radical and start annoying people with my standard rant about the shitness of gearing on off the shelf bikes.
...

I, for one, agree. Emulating pro racers doesn't really work for me.

My 8sp triple set up works thus 26t ring 30,26,23,20,17,15, 34t ring 30,26,23,20,17,15,13,11, 46t ring 17,15,13 and, downhill with a tail wind, 11. I have on one occasion had to take the fd out of play and the 34 ring was quite adequate to finish the ride although sub-optimal. I don't need a processor to tell me which gear I want to be in, my legs tell me that!

The way to improve the gearing options on ready built bikes in the shops is not to buy them. It's your money, make it work for you not some technofreek! The way to get what you want is to stop buying what you don't want! And tell the shops, the suppliers, the manufacturers what you think of their choices!

I was tempted by your challenge. I would happily do that circuit on my AW- but it won't be at audax speed and it most certainly wouldn't be in july, unless Holland and Belgium are an awful lot cooler than central France (july I finish riding at 10a.m.). I am not sure that I would do any 3000m 200 in the delays on any bike, regardless of transmission.

I would almost certainly risk falling over at silly slow speeds uphill. I think my cadence is below 60rpm uphill.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: alexb on December 05, 2019, 02:58:56 pm

As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.

Hard to gauge as I don't generally clean a chain, just keep adding more lube. I got ~3000km from my first 11 speed chain, and would get about ~4500km from a 10 speed chain. The chains in question being KMC X11sl and X10sl. Is the chain life a bit low because I don't clean them properly, or is it low because of the inherent design restrictions of 11 speed? Hard to say. Chains are replaced at 0.5% stretch on the 11 speed, and 0.75% stretch on the 10 speed.


This is more or less exactly what I've fond running 10 speed KMC chains.
I do clean mine and run either Decathlon wet lube (for long rides) or wax based dry lubes on shorter rides.
Cleaning is generally a matter of blasting the chain with WD40, wiping it repeatedly with a rag until it's mostly clean - i.e the rag is coming off much less "oily"
I then store the bike like that and lube the chain at the next outing.

Seems to work OK, with nice quiet running and reliable shifting.

Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: zigzag on December 05, 2019, 03:03:37 pm
As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.

Apparently modern chains do last longer. I've recently read a write up of tests where both Shimano and SRAM 12 speed chains last twice as long as 9 speed and cheap 10 and 11 speed  KMC chains.  :o

(https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Shimano-8-vs-9-vs-10-vs-11-vs-12-speed-chains-durability-chart-new-copy-1280x774.jpg)

this article (https://cyclingtips.com/2019/12/the-best-bicycle-chain-durability-and-efficiency-tested/?fbclid=IwAR0K3cxFlpD7s9ITEpPpf3PjKMCZBMc6O2vgYyeI1JeV4pUVGNqcOZBvogk) perhaps?
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Brucey on December 05, 2019, 03:14:13 pm
As others have mentioned, what is the chain wear like with such a large spread of the chain.  Or are modern chains better at that sort of thing than the old 5 speed chains.

Apparently modern chains do last longer. I've recently read a write up of tests where both Shimano and SRAM 12 speed chains last twice as long as 9 speed and cheap 10 and 11 speed  KMC chains.  :o

(https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Shimano-8-vs-9-vs-10-vs-11-vs-12-speed-chains-durability-chart-new-copy-1280x774.jpg)

this article (https://cyclingtips.com/2019/12/the-best-bicycle-chain-durability-and-efficiency-tested/?fbclid=IwAR0K3cxFlpD7s9ITEpPpf3PjKMCZBMc6O2vgYyeI1JeV4pUVGNqcOZBvogk) perhaps?

big shock there; despite being fractionally narrower,  expensive chains (using the latest hardening technology)  last longer than cheap chains!  Who'd have thunk it?..... ::-)

Many riders are most interested in the most cost-effective strategy (in time and/or money terms). That varies with the use/maintenance regime of course. No point in spending a lot on a chain if it is just going to go rusty....?

cheers

Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Gattopardo on December 05, 2019, 03:17:49 pm
So do three 8 speed chains cost more than 1 12 speed chain?
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Kim on December 05, 2019, 03:31:14 pm
Many riders are most interested in the most cost-effective strategy (in time and/or money terms). That varies with the use/maintenance regime of course. No point in spending a lot on a chain if it is just going to go rusty....?

Perhaps counter-intuitively, I use an expensive chain (SRAM PC991) on my about-town bike because it *doesn't* go rusty when neglected.  It does a fraction of the mileage of my other bikes, so I'm not replacing it very often, and I consider the more expensive chain worthwhile for not having to worry about it.

The nicer bikes tend to get more chain maintenance (either in the interests of reliability/performance, or because they end up absolutely covered in mud), so can have less posh chains.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: grams on December 05, 2019, 03:44:21 pm
big shock there; despite being fractionally narrower

The longitudinal wear surfaces are still ~3/16 inch wide on all multi-speed chains, so number of speeds shouldn't be a direct cause of more or less wear.

Clicking through to the article it's nice to see my preferred SRAM PC-1130 wins the value/km chart. It's £10-15 for 2000 km *. Nickel plated too, so doesn't rust.

(* I'm sure I get far more than that out of them, but then I don't bother much with chain stretch checkers/percentages, because I am a monster)
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: bludger on December 05, 2019, 03:48:06 pm
My dad's got a big box of SRAM 11 speed chains he got off Planet X (where else) for stupid discounts a while ago, we just bung them on all the bikes excluding the SSs, works a treat.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Brucey on December 05, 2019, 04:48:07 pm
big shock there; despite being fractionally narrower

The longitudinal wear surfaces are still ~3/16 inch wide on all multi-speed chains, so number of speeds shouldn't be a direct cause of more or less wear.


I'm not sure that is what you meant to say, and if it is, then I don't agree. Derailleur chains have been nominally 3/32"  for some years and 9s 10, 11, 12s chains are narrower; nominally 11/128" . The outer width of chains can be reduced because the steel that is used for the side plates is stronger and can therefore be made thinner. Rivets don't pull out of sideplates because of changes in rivet design.

However  the pin bushing wear surfaces are much narrower than you might expect because

a) the inner side plates are pierced so there is an entry radius to the pin bushing, i.e. it is shorter than you might expect and
b) the half-bushings don't even meet in the middle anyway.

You only need to look at a worn chain link to see what I mean; the pins usually bear scars which show clearly that the half-bushings are each about 1mm wide.

Modern chains derive a small benefit in that the half-bushings share the load slightly better when the chain articulates (bad chainline) simply because the half-bushings are closer together. However the life extension is possible in most cases because of hard-coating/lubrication  technologies such as PTFE coating and/or DLC and so forth.

A further complication is that all things being equal, narrower sprockets (which have gradually gone from about 2.0mm thickness to less than 1.6mm) wear faster, and worn sprockets usually cause the chain to see more articulation under load, so worn sprockets may accelerate chain wear, and skinnier sprockets cause that whole process to speed up.   [FWIW there is definitely an effect there; for example  it is not at all unusual to see that the (narrower) tooth next to a shift ramp is noticeably more worn than any of the other teeth on any given sprocket.]

Cassettes and sprockets that are used with more than one chain are not free from wear; it is just that if the chain is changed soon enough the teeth still keep approximately the right shape. If you do this in the right way then about 1mm can be lost from each tooth and it will still run OK with a new(ish) chain.

cheers
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mattc on December 05, 2019, 07:29:45 pm
Quick-links (and their ilk):

I don't know whether this is an issue - it used to be. As I recall, the first 10sp chains didn't have reusable quick-links, but I know they fixed that at some point, cos I've got one for my recently purchased 10sp!

So can you now also get quick-links for 11sp 12sp & 13speed?
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Brucey on December 05, 2019, 08:25:33 pm
Quick-links (and their ilk):

I don't know whether this is an issue - it used to be. As I recall, the first 10sp chains didn't have reusable quick-links, but I know they fixed that at some point, cos I've got one for my recently purchased 10sp!

So can you now also get quick-links for 11sp 12sp & 13speed?

KMC list re-usable QLs for 10s, 11s but not 12s at present (only single-use ones).  When I looked about a year ago you couldn't get re-usable links in 11s but you could in 10s of course.

cheers
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 06, 2019, 12:32:02 am
This is more or less exactly what I've fond running 10 speed KMC chains.
I do clean mine and run either Decathlon wet lube (for long rides) or wax based dry lubes on shorter rides.
Cleaning is generally a matter of blasting the chain with WD40, wiping it repeatedly with a rag until it's mostly clean - i.e the rag is coming off much less "oily"
I then store the bike like that and lube the chain at the next outing.

Seems to work OK, with nice quiet running and reliable shifting.

I use Chain-L lube, which likes to sit for a period before you use the bike. So My preference is to apply lube and leave it over night to wick down into the rollers properly. I've never got the supposed 1600km between applications that they claim, but I have managed 800+km. That said, My usual need for reapplication is due to rain. Perhaps it's more I only get ~800km between rain...

Last time I checked (Crowcombe Hill, Quantocks), I was pushing a loaded touring bike at 3 kph where I'd been pedaling at 4.5 to 5 kph (until I tried to shake a drop of sweat off my eyelash before it got in my eye, and lost my balance)

Pushing can be as slow as 2.5kph for me, I tend to have to stop and walk when speed drops to 5kph if their's any gradient. That said, I can happily ride along next to someone walking at ~3kph no problem.

Quote
The biggest 8 speed cassette I can find is an 11-34.
11-40 8 speed here (https://pedalbits.net/collections/cassettes-1/products/sunrace-cs-ms6-8-speed-wide-ratio-11-40t-mountain-bike-cassette-silver)

Ah, useful. Quite big jumps at the big end.


Suspect alot is being lost in my humour, I could not do that even on a motorbike.   

Do you think that there will there will be some people doing it with a fixed gear?

No idea. The hilly audax tends to have a low turnout compared to the rest of the year. Last year we had only 1, me. Oh, and 37 men.

Quote
Do you rotate three chains to keep the the cassette life or one chain then another.

Being nosey as I'm thinking of going 1x9 or 1x10 on the mountain bike.

I keep the chain wear gauge near the bike, and every time I feel like I've done a few thousand kilometers, I start checking it every few hundred. I try to run 3 chains per cassette, and was planning on 3 cassettes per chainset, but I find the chain rings only seem to last about 15000km, Tho I perhaps should start monitoring them sooner, last time I posted a picture on twitter, and people were horrified at how worn they are. I have come to accept that at the distance I am doing, I am going to spend a lot on parts for my bike.

One of the reasons I upgraded to using X11SL, is the pins are hollow. This allows for more options after the life of the chain. I have a pedant (featured on the GCN show!) that I wear all the time, it is made from the X10SL chain that I used to ride to Hell. That trip was a game changer for me, and wearing the pendant made from the chain reminds me of that. It's a lot easier with the hollow pins. I am also experimenting with laser etching links used for significant rides (Hell, RatN, TCR Etc...). I have yet to work out what to do with the dead chain rings or cassettes yet.

Quote
Wonder how that happens, different materials for the chain?

Improvements in materials science.

Perhaps counter-intuitively, I use an expensive chain (SRAM PC991) on my about-town bike because it *doesn't* go rusty when neglected.  It does a fraction of the mileage of my other bikes, so I'm not replacing it very often, and I consider the more expensive chain worthwhile for not having to worry about it.

The nicer bikes tend to get more chain maintenance (either in the interests of reliability/performance, or because they end up absolutely covered in mud), so can have less posh chains.

I was amazed at how rust prone the default tiagra chain was that came with the groupset I bought. I was also disappointed by the KMC X10.93 rusting fast, tho slower than the tiagra chain.

Even a KMC X10SL will rust after a bit of use if you wash all the lube off it, then hang it up in the bathroom... DAMHIKT...

big shock there; despite being fractionally narrower,  expensive chains (using the latest hardening technology)  last longer than cheap chains!  Who'd have thunk it?..... ::-)

Many riders are most interested in the most cost-effective strategy (in time and/or money terms). That varies with the use/maintenance regime of course. No point in spending a lot on a chain if it is just going to go rusty....?

Usefully the article linked does provide a graph of cost per 10000km for each chain. Looks like my prefered chain is about $250 per 10000km. Tho I think that may be based on RRP. I pay €44 per chain, and get ~3000km out of it.

There is also an environmental question. Is it better to use fewer more expensive chains, or a larger number of cheaper ones. What is the relative environmental impact of making a chain? Does the extra coating have a bigger footprint?

KMC list re-usable QLs for 10s, 11s but not 12s at present (only single-use ones).  When I looked about a year ago you couldn't get re-usable links in 11s but you could in 10s of course.

Yep. I notice tho that quick links rust faster than any other links on the modern chains. Based on the sticking them on the edge of the sink and forgetting about them till they have turned totally orange...

J
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Kim on December 06, 2019, 12:49:02 am
Yep. I notice tho that quick links rust faster than any other links on the modern chains. Based on the sticking them on the edge of the sink and forgetting about them till they have turned totally orange...

Stick them to the fridge magnets.  Less exposure to wet, corrosive stuff.  I've got a set of 7S ones that date from the last time I had a 7S chain...
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 06, 2019, 12:50:03 am
Yep. I notice tho that quick links rust faster than any other links on the modern chains. Based on the sticking them on the edge of the sink and forgetting about them till they have turned totally orange...

Fridge magnets.

Chocolate biscuits.

J

PS I think going for a word association game may be off topic tho... 
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 06, 2019, 11:23:02 am
Stick them to the fridge magnets.  Less exposure to wet, corrosive stuff.  I've got a set of 7S ones that date from the last time I had a 7S chain...

Hey no fair, you edited your post so now my reply doesn't make sense :(

J
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Kim on December 06, 2019, 05:21:43 pm
Stick them to the fridge magnets.  Less exposure to wet, corrosive stuff.  I've got a set of 7S ones that date from the last time I had a 7S chain...

Hey no fair, you edited your post so now my reply doesn't make sense :(

You managed to quote my reply in the time it took between me realising that a bit more context would probably help and the edit request submitting.

You'd have lost at Mallett's Mallet anyway.  Biscuits don't go in the fridge.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 06, 2019, 06:38:03 pm


You managed to quote my reply in the time it took between me realising that a bit more context would probably help and the edit request submitting.

You'd have lost at Mallett's Mallet anyway.  Biscuits don't go in the fridge.

They do in summer, else the chocolate melts...

J
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: quixoticgeek on December 07, 2019, 05:52:38 am

Just to add another data point re rust on expensive trains.

On Thursday on my way home from work it was raining for some of the ride, and the roads had been salted. As such when I got home I went to the drastic length of putting the bike in the shower, and rinsing it off. I then left it about 24 hours before putting lube on.

Despite my best efforts not to wash the drive train, it was pretty dry, and i noticed some surface rust on some of the rollers, I also noticed a little surface rust on the wear side of the teath on some of the rear sprockets.

I'm actually surprised, that chain is less than 300km old, and is a KMC X11sl. I'm hoping that it's just very mild surface rust, and will rub off quickly when I start riding today, and in doing so doesn't shorten the life too much.

J
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: hatler on December 07, 2019, 09:18:22 am
Bare steel starts rusting in damp conditions in about five minutes.
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Brucey on December 07, 2019, 09:27:19 am
at one time I used a MTB to commute and I could do it half on, half off road. The round trip took the thick end of two hours if the conditions were bad.  Between mud and road salt I soon found that the best option for me was to wash the whole bike every day, including the transmission. [I had a pressure washer that could be connected to the hot tap for this purpose; it only took five minutes to do].  I found that I didn't need a very good chain lube to last a single day, and that if a water displacing lube was used on the (now clean) chain in the evening, and left overnight to dry, there was usually enough lube on the chain for the following day.  I chose the lube on the basis that it only had to last one day, and it was easier for me if it came off the chain easily in a  hot jetwash.

I used to check the bike in the middle of the day, just to be sure I hadn't picked up a slow puncture or something.  Occasionally there was so much road salt that the lube would already  be overwhelmed and the chain would be starting to go rusty when I checked the bike at lunchtime. On a few occasions some extra lube was required to stop the chain from developing stiff links that would be troublesome on the way home.  I think that (extreme) amount of road salt would have gone through any chain lube, given time, and that many chain lubes would start to suffer/fail inside a day or two.  TBH I have not found a winter  chain lube yet that provides really good protection (that lasts days or weeks)  from road salt that isn't also something of a dirt magnet.

FWIW once the chain is really clean, you don't need a very super water displacing lube to displace the remaining water and thus stop the chain from rusting significantly overnight. But if the chain is in any way dirty or still contaminated with road salt, very few(simple) water displacing lubes are worth putting on a chain; they are most likely to be ineffective.

Regarding chains, there are various treatments applied to  new chains which inhibit wear and/or make the chain look shiny.  If you are prepared to spend a lot you can get chains which last longer because the hard coatings don't wear off/through very quickly. But in a mid-price chain the main benefit of a shiny plated  finish is that it allows you to see more easily if the chain is dirty or not; if you examine such a chain when it has done a few hundred miles, you will usually find that the shiny finish as already been worn away where the chain surfaces contact one another and this means that it cannot provide any protection (where it is really needed) against corrosion.

 Corrosion between the side plates/under the rollers is mainly annoying (although rust is acidic and also corrupts chain lube faster than normal) but rust inside the bushings soon follows and this causes the chain to wear out double-quick. For example folk who mainly use their bike once a week in winter report to me that often, the chain develops stiff links where it has been left standing , usually in the part of the chain which is in the RD  (possibly this stays wetter for longer when the bike is stored or something).  Anyway, after a few goes at this, when you go to use a chain wear checker, you often get rather variable results on such chains; depending on when it is checked, the most rusted links will either measure too short (because they still have rust inside the bushings) or too long (because the rust has caused faster wear than normal).

Some folk -by virtue of where and when they ride- are never very likely to ride on a freshly gritted road, but those who do can suffer spectacular corrosion on their bikes unless they take preventive measures.

cheers
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: mzjo on December 07, 2019, 01:30:59 pm
On steel rusting quickly - several years ago I worked in the workshop of an importer repairing hydraulic breakers. We had a parts washer (a bit like a giant dishwasher) to clean and degrease the bits including cylinder bushings (which were from inside the hammer and therefore clean steel). The parts washer as supplied by our dutch colleagues had the water temperature a bit too hot. As a result cylinder bushings were already starting to rust before the basket of the parts washer had stopped spinning! (About 15mins from start of cycle). Lowering the water temperature helped a lot!
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: bludger on December 07, 2019, 10:07:56 pm
The only way out seems to be an IGH and a fully-enclosed chain guard like the hebie chainglider. My neighbours gazelle has one, I expect it's got a chain inside it you could eat your tea off.

http://thorncyclesforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=2233.0
Title: Re: The Anti 1x thread
Post by: Jakob W on December 07, 2019, 10:45:02 pm
Not entirely IME, though they do tend to be cleaner than derailer transmissions. Flipping it, one advantage of a full chaincase is that whenever crud's on the chain won't come off on your clothes, so you can just add some sticky/long-lasting lube every x-thousand miles and forget about it until the next time. I don't think I've ever worn out a chain on any bike I've owned with an enclosed transmission - next time I'm doing maintenance on the bakfiets I must check what the chain stretch is.