fronesis

These threads seem to always break down into three categories of participants:

1. People who have never really ridden 1x who are bizarrely fixated on why they hate it so much, and seem to have to make threads about why it's a terrible idea.

2. Reluctant responders who have been riding 1x and can report that it works out great: cross-chaining isn't a problem; drivetrain noise and wear isn't a problem; the jumps between gears are not as big as everyone thinks they are (check out a gear calculator and compare to the compact doubles most people are riding today); and there are some real advantages in simplicity.

3. Everyone else who brings along the popcorn and throws in the occasional (and justifiable) jokes about SRAM FDs.

Bottom line: I don't think anyone riding 1x plans to take anyone's FD's away, so give it a rest.

noodle soup

Obviously you didn’t read this thread before making your long winded post.

fronesis

Long-winded?

79pmooney

I love close spacing, Have since I raced 40 years ago. Never "got" compact doubles. When I hung up my race number, I went back to the triple that I raced my first season, a 53-42-28. I have aged so I now run 50-38-24 but I still run the 13-14-15-17-19 I raced those many years ago (with the luxury of being able to add 12, 16, 18, 21, 23, 25, and 28 tooth cogs as I see fit). Current favorite is 12,14-19, 21,23.

Running a 46 x 11,13-15,17,19,21,23,25,28,32,36 would give me the same high and same gaps I love but it would sacrifice the 24-23 low (28 gi) and force me to ride a 46-36 (34 gi or 22% higher). And I would have to pass up on the 16 and 18 tooth cogs of the 9-speed cassette I am riding now. And if I want seriously low gears the 24 and 28 go on. The 28 gives me 23 gi or a 46 x 54. That 11-54 would have a few gaps. Or maybe I should wait for the 10 x 50 13-speed.

I am very familiar with gear charts. I've been using them 45 years. (Well, not the full charts. They were hard to find then and without Excel, took to long to do on a calculator, so I just calculated the options I was looking at.)

I had the revelation that I loved close gearing when I combined that 13-19 FW and my 52-42-28 triple. Raced that same FW on the classic 52 or more by 42 crankset like we all did. Rode everywhere on those gears. Now this body has aged and I cannot do 42x19 uphill at will, but I will keep those cassette cogs 'til I die and just reduce the chainring sizes as needed. Love, love, love going uphill in the middle of a cassette with choices! 1 and 2 tooth choices!

I have no issue with others going 1X. In fact current trends means demand for the stuff I want is down. Building up triples is cheap! (I guess not if you have to have index shifting.)

Ben

fronesis

Just want to say that I agree COMPLETELY with the above.

If the frame of comparison is between today's 1x11 or 1x12 and an old-school setup like this where the cassette has basically 1-tooth steps throughout, then there is no doubt that a 1x will have much bigger jumps in gears. And I totally get why that's a tradeoff.

My only point is that if the frame of reference is today's more standard compact doubles, where lots of new bikes are coming with a 50/34 up front and an 11-30 or 11-32 in the back, then the critique of 1x for having big jumps is no longer tenable. If you look at a gear chart comparison between a 1x that's a 42 up front and an 11-36 in the back, and then compare it with 50/34 and 11-30, you will see that the jumps are very very similar. The only real difference is that you lose some top end on the 1x. My 1x spins out at around 34mph. Anyone who needs to be adding speed by pedaling (rather than by tucking) while already at 34mph...they shouldn't go 1x.

Seattle Forrest

I like white cheddar popcorn.

But this thread has basically thing to do with drive trains.

shelbyfv

Yep, always a good idea to read beyond the title.

boberuddy

I agree completely. You could ride in a flater terrain area and never need a granny for the hills. My fixie can go up decent hills when I am in shape, but a 1x would go most anywhere with a strong rider. Each person can explore and do what's good for them.
Bob

ksryder

myisland

My crankset is Shimano Exage300EX biopace double DOUBLE CHAINRING 52/40.
My casette is Shimano Hyperglide 7 speed 13-15-17-19-21-23-26T.

My rides are flat with a few short gentle hills and I always use the 52 chainring because it's simpler. Once I get up to speed I tend stay in 26/52

How will 1x11 or 1x12 improve my ride?

shelbyfv

What leads you to think it will?

WhyFi

seypat

Another triple rider here also. It's just easier for me to dump gears up or down or get to any gear I want with 3 rings instead of 2. That's the same reason I also still ride friction. It reduces the amount of shifts I physically have to make.(when I have to change gears) It's only 1 movement of 1 shifter or 1 movement of each shifter no matter how many gears I need to change. Over the period of a day's ride, that's a lot less shifting. I don't have any problems shifting a FD.

79pmooney

I'm trusting the 26/52 is a typo. If not, that is a poor gear choice, very hard on chains and with a lot of friction. The 1X running in a 46-23 in the middle of the cassette would be the same gear ratio, run far better, more efficiently and with less wear. There was a study done recently on friction measured on 1X and 2X drivetrains. There was a lot of variation. Worst was the extreme cross-overs with doubles. Close was the extremes on the 1X. Using good gear choices, the double came out ahead on almost every ratio and much better on some. Lennard Zinn talked about this study so you can find out more reading his VeloNews entries of this year.

Ben

79pmooney

+1

myisland

So there's no mathematical reason why it would?

myisland

Not a typo. I'm using it as a 7 speed. When I get to the little hills I shift it down to 23 and stand up and pump. I would like to go faster for the energy expended.

seypat

Are we currently in intermission until a picture surfaces? If/when that happens, the MyTi feature will start back up and we can return to our seats.

79pmooney

Why not shift in front and stand the slightly higher 40-17 or sit for the slightly lower 40-19? Take advantage of the two tooth gaps? Ride a near straight (and efficient) chain? Be able to wear down the guys around you in big gap cassettes because you can do subtle gear changes every time the road levels out a touch?

Standing isn't about going faster for energy expended. You expend more. You use less of your muscle reserves but at higher heartrate, breathing, calorie and blood sugar loss. I'm a born climber who loves to stand. I can do it all day. But I don't pretend it is more efficient. Spent too much time monitoring speed, cadence and heartrate.

Ben

Kimmo

Cool, so since I reckon compact is crap, I'm free to hate on one-by.

Once again - when folks realise big gaps suck, and it's time for a new trend, 38/50/52 will be a thing on electronic groups, and it will kick arse.

Seattle Forrest

You don't need a FD because 1x, you don't need a RD because fixed, and I don't need a bike because I have shoes and know how to walk. But I sure do enjoy riding a good bike and having the gearing not get in my way even over varied terrain and surfaces.

seypat

I've always thought that if the drivetrain companies get electronic shifting good enough that the rider is no longer shifting the FD, the industry will go back to 3-5X in front and less gears in back. Why stop there. They might as well move on to handlebars with pressure sensors instead of brake/shifter levers.

softreset

Straight shocked we haven't seen the Emonda posted in this thread yet, come on, don't keep us waiting any longer!

myisland

Thanks Ben, I need to learn how to use better gear ratios. I ride solo for exercise but I'd still like to pass some guys who are going faster but who seem to be expending less energy than me. Yep, standing is more fun than sitting. The only monitoring that I do is to look at my speedometer. If I knew my heartrate I might panic.

shelbyfv

OP bailed a page or so back. Probably moved on to another sock.