fietsbob

Cyclocross racing has opted for a single front ring as an option for decades..

Campagnolo has made pairs of guard rings in 4 diameters .. to use chainrings from 42 - 52t.

redlude97

This. For gravel I've never had an issue with 2x either, only dropped chains last year on 2x during a few races. Made it through this entire season without a dropped chain on 1x and a clutched RD and chain keeper with lots of crashes.

Banzai

I think it has more to do with that crank, though Sora front shifters have always been clunky.

I have an Ultegra triple crankset on one bike. The performance is...revelatory. It changed my mind forever about how well a triple can work. Flawless, smooth, amazing shifting, every time.

Metieval

Frame flex combined with BB crankset flex can make a huge difference in shifting also.

HTupolev

In my experience, if anything, the typical smaller jumps between chainrings on triples makes them shift better than doubles. Even a perfectly-smooth 16T upshift takes a moment to resolve as the chain lifts into place. Jumps of 12T and less can feel very snappy by comparison.

Metieval

the throw distance also plays a part in shifting.
red/force 105/ultegra never took much to shift.

Sora (9 speed) has a wicked long throw that is harder to get clean shifts with, I have found Apex 2x to be the same way the lever throw is difficult to get a good clean crisp Shift.

one of the many things i love about my di2. hit button and boom I get a Crisp, clean, fast, and perfect shift every time!

I am of the opinion that bad shifts are probably 99% user caused.

Not everyone could drive an manual transmission. I don't think everyone can drive manual shifting bicycles either.

Metieval

Last years "Ride of Silence" was An ugly mess of chains, chainrings, and cogs groaning in protest of people shifting under load etc.... Oh well it keeps the bike shops in business. Add lack of chain maintenance by the same people, and you can guarantee they don't do any cable maintenance.

Sticky cables messing with cable tension. makes for bad shifting.

Someone was bad mouthing the brand of their car the other day because it quit running. Close to 100,000 miles and they never did an oil change. Uh yeah totally the brands fault! lol

davei1980

I LIKE SMALL CHAIN RINGS.

There. I said it.

Banzai

Very true. And it gives me the gear range to really tighten the gaps in the cassette.

BluesDawg

Don't blame SRAM for Andy Schleck not knowing how to shift.

Andy_K 

Campagnolo would have included a stern warning saying that only trained and certified riders should attempt to use their equipment.

Banzai

SRAM front shifting: *scrape scrape rattle rattle clunk* - shift complete.

Shimano front shifting: *ssssnikt* - shift complete.

Facanh

Does that describe every single SRAM and Shimano FD ever produced?

What about all the different cranksets with varying teeth difference and different shifting "profiles" on the chainring?

1X front shifting is still the best.

(Don't take me seriously)

fietsbob

I have a gearbox crank-set.. chain ring and crank-arms can turn at different rates or the same rate.

Metieval

I think it describes the lack of mechanical ability to set SRAM yaw correctly.

fietsbob

the issue does not come up with friction shifted fronts if well timed and not forced,
but that even though slight, requires thinking and planning..


engineers took the thinking part away, and increased the market size..

redlude97

which is common for gravel/cyclocross setups with 36/46 or 34/46. Lots of euro teams even run 39/46. Shifts are smooth as butter in ideal situations and still work well completely contaminated with mud and/or sand

Metieval

so is a 48/32 with Ultegra FD-R8000 going to shift badly?

HTupolev

What do you mean by "badly"? As long as it's adjusted right, and the crankset is well-designed, it should shift smoothly and consistently. Shifts just won't complete as rapidly as they do with tighter-spaced chainrings.

Metieval

so non issue then, Nice!

Hiro11

I have 2 1x bikes (gravel and MTB) and 2 2x bikes (road and fat). The only differences I've seen between 1x and 2x:
1. 1x is simpler, obviously.
2. 2x has small jumps between gears.

Chain retention, gear range and ability to dump a bunch of gear inches quickly are all about the same.

On gravel and MTB, I don't care about super fine gradations of gearing, so 1x works fine. I can't see myself ever using a 2x on an MTB as it's unnecessary. On the road, I definitely prefer a 2x, albeit I rarely use the small ring here in the flat Midwest. I like the 2x on the fattie because for slow snow crawling I like the 22 ring while for summer trails I like the 32.

Sully151

How well does a 1X work on a bikepacking bike?

I am thinking about a new bike, but the one I want only comes in a 1X.

mstateglfr 

What is the gear range? Touring typically requires easier gearing since you climb woth more weight. Touring on dirt and gravel makes it that.much more difficult due to resistance.

jitteringjr

I'd love to have the simplicity of 1X and no dropped chains. But the reality is I am too picky about my cadence and that is true if I am on the road or on single track. 1X will need to go to like 14 speed before I would want to switch. My MTB is ancient and still has a triple and I use them all. My cross/gravel bike I am building now will be 2X and my road bike is 2X. And about dropped chains, for me I usually find that the low limit screw on the FD vibrated loose or something and if I drop a chain here or there, a quick tweak fixes that problem.

And I can't believe how well my new 9100 DA FD up shifts, wow.

Sully151

Yeah, its a 42 tooth chainring with an 11-36 cassette. Probably not the best bike packing set up.