Author Topic: The Anti 1x thread  (Read 2469 times)

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #25 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
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #26 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!

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #27 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 :)
Duct tape is magic and should be worshipped

Woofage

  • Ain't no hooves on my bike.
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #28 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.)
Pen Pusher

vorsprung

  • Opposites Attract
    • Audaxing
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #29 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

Audaxing Blog follow @vorsprungbike on

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #30 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 :(

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #31 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  ;)

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #32 on: December 03, 2019, 07:32:02 pm »
Fast women are desirable  ;)

Unlike loose bikes...
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #33 on: December 03, 2019, 07:33:12 pm »

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #34 on: December 03, 2019, 08:04:50 pm »
I can see a T-shirt in the making here ...
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #35 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"!
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #36 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.

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #37 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

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #38 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).
Never tell me the odds.

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #39 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! :)

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #40 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...)

Feanor

  • It's mostly downhill from here.
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #41 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>

ElyDave

  • Royal and Ancient Polar Bear Society member 263583
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #42 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.
“Procrastination is the thief of time, collar him.” –Charles Dickens

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #43 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.
Rust never sleeps

Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #44 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.
Rust never sleeps

zigzag

  • unfuckwithable
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #45 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.)

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #46 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...
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

Gattopardo

  • Lord of the sith
  • Overseaing the building of the death star
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #47 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.

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #48 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/
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

Gattopardo

  • Lord of the sith
  • Overseaing the building of the death star
Re: The Anti 1x thread
« Reply #49 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.