DrIsotope

I climb plenty of hills, and I'm nothing but pleased with my 1x10. The harsh truth that few want to admit is that the big ring-- be it a 50T or anything bigger-- is of extremely limited utility, unless you race or ride in very fast groups. Most folks with a compact or mid-compact only touch the 11 and 12 when going downhill. I run a 42T in the front, and use every cog on the cassette on every ride.

If you're gonna put 2 or 3 chainrings on the front, might as well drop down to 6 or 7 in the back-- the chain will last a whole lot longer.

HTupolev

The are two circumstances where current 1x systems work very well.
1-If you're doing something like MTB where you won't really be settling into a cadence, the poor gear spacing of a wide 1x system is acceptable.
2-If you ride on the flats where you simply don't need a very wide gearing range, an 11-25 11-speed cassette can provide adequate spacing over a good-enough range.

But if you want a bike for road rides including flats and epic ascents and rolling hills and everything in between, 1x will make significant compromises. Gear narrow, and you'll bottom out horribly in the hills. Gear wide, and you won't be able to find the gear you want while flying across the flats. Split the difference by using a narrow cassette with a tiny chainring, and you won't have high gears. Etc.

The cycling industry has moved to more gears in back because there were drawbacks to having fewer. In the 1980s, a wide-range road bike might have a 52-42 crankset and a 14-28 6-speed freewheel. I have a bike like this, a 1983 Miyata 710. The chainrings 1.5-step the freewheel pretty well, and it handles cross-chaining well enough that the only gear I don't use is the big-big, so I get 11 real useful ratios out of the 2x6 drivetrain. While I like riding it, its gearing is not adequate for everything I ask it to do. The low gears don't go that low, and spacing in the low gears is quite poor, so long and/or steep climbs are very problematic. The gearing also simply doesn't go all that high, and I sometimes have issues keeping reasonable cadence on aggressive descents, especially in pacelined gradual downhills if the person pulling is being epic.

Here's a log chart comparing the vintage setup to all current SRAM Force 1 cassettes. Higher dots are higher gears. The reason the dots are staggered for the Miyata is the two chainrings, 52T ring on the left and 42T ring on the right. Red X is the cross-chain that I avoid.



Without having more gears, it's not really possible for the 1x systems to solve all the weaknesses of the 1983 system without opening up new weaknesses. The entire reason 7/8/9/10/11-speed drivetrains were created was to avoid having to make these compromises. And in the current market, it's sort of easier to just not make them.

I do quite a bit of my road riding on what's essentially a mountain 3x7, lol. Not totally flawless, but shockingly good for a combination of chainrings and cassette that I didn't really plan out and which wasn't designed for the task.

noodle soup

I don't worry about chain bounce/slap with 2x 11 gearing. It's not an issue

garciawork

I am certainly intrigued by the prospect of one day not having a front derailleur on a road bike, but I really don't see it being practical at the moment, as a cyclist who tries to hit the appropriate cadence for the conditions. It seems to me that range-wise, current 1x's with a 10 high and 42 low and a well selected front ring will provide enough range, but its the huge steps that are a problem. If you are in no way focused on cadence (which you should be) and don't mind feeling like you are spinning out or mashing a bit in a number of scenarios, a 1x could work, but I think it will become a limiting factor over time.

Gravel/CX/MTB? I don't think I will own another 2x drivetrain. Completely different story.

zymphad

You need better read derailleur... Like they improved 10 years ago.

I agree with you. I rather spin 34 x 28 than 46 x 42. 42 looks moronic, idiotic. Just buy a MTB, so you can walk up the hill and only go downhill. God forbid someone might actually have to sweat riding up a hill. God forbid you have to put some effort in your 1,500+ feet of elevation ride.

I don't see the fun in making a simple machine as stupid as possible. Where is the fun in riding a bike so simple. Might as well get rid of the gears and shifters and go with an auto variable drivetrain.

IMO some people should just buy a touring 1x1 single speed e-Bike if 2x11 is too difficult and if they don't want to sweat, getting a good workout on their rides.

GeneO 

Have better read derailleur

DrIsotope

I think just the opposite. People seem to believe they need 22 gears with 4rpm steps between gears, then they go out and ride and use 6 or 7 of those 22 gears. Since I converted from 20 speeds to 10, my average cadence has gone up-- with only 10 gears (and 15rpm jumps) to chose from, I have to either spin or mash. With 20 or 22, you can pick whatever's close.

Because as I've said before a hundred times, unless the bike is how you get your paycheck, you're riding it for fun just like the rest of us. Road 1x isn't some performance-hampering compromise. It's just less shifting.

zymphad

Thanks for pointing out my spelling mistake. lulz, hope it made your day.

garciawork

A valid point. For me personally, however, I have actually had to take steps to lower my cadence, and I HATE mashing, so having more gear choices is beneficial to me, hence not preferring the idea of 1x drivetrains. That said, if I lived really close to some awesome climbs, and had the money, I would totally own a climbing bike with a 1x, just for the weight savings. Living out in a flat area and having to ride to climbs, and preferring a specific cadence, the 22 works better for me.

zymphad

Less shifting. Two gears in the front is really that taxing? Too hard on the brain, should I be on the 50 or the 34. Am I struggling to keep my cadence on the hill or not? Am I downhill? should I go on the 34 and spin out or go on the 50? Screw it, I need a 1x with a 42 in the back. Auugh, this is so complicated!

DrIsotope

My decision to ditch the FD did not come quickly-- it come over the span of wearing out a handful of cassettes-- and when they were ready for the bin, at least half the cogs would still be in excellent condition, As a mini-hoarder, I would toss all of those new-ish 11T, 12T and 14T cogs into a bin... and now I have a use for them.

I mean, I'm liking the 1X setup so far, but it hasn't been long enough to make that final, longevity-based judgment, If the life of the chainrings or cogs is dramatically shortened, then that FD is gonna go back on. I'll make a compromise here and there, but I'm not replacing chainrings three times a year.

cellery

I am only ~0.5 slower on my heavy steel 1x11 AWOL tourer with than my Giant TCR which has the standard road compact gearing of our day. The issue with 1X is not high/low range but is, as has been pointed out, gear spacing - since you are fitting all that high/low range into one 'uuge cassette. Frankly, for adventure/gravel/mtb I really like 1x. It's nice to be able to pop that chain off in a couple seconds when I'm scrubbing my dirty drive-train every other ride. And the simplicity is nice when you're too busy worrying about rock gardens, washboard and holes to have a dumb front chainring to consider. It also practically eliminated chain slap when paired with a clutch rear derailleur - big bonus on the rough stuff. That said, I will never give up on a 2x road compact for road riding and group rides with the smooth transitions between gears and cadence vs. speed efficiency it provides. I can't even imagine trying to keep on the the Saturday morning ego-fest on a 1x.

If I had to pick a bike specifically for road that was 1X, it would probably be something like the Specialized Diverge, albeit with a 42t ring instead of that godawful 46t that you won't be able to climb or cut a headwind through. Seriously, I think Spec. trying to market some kind of gravel crit bike (??).

cellery

This is really not the issue. There are multiple benefits (and drawbacks) to ditching the front for a wider rear. Less complex shifting is just icing on the cake... unless you really, really love hearing that slow, chain-drop prone safety gamble of a clunk while chain slapping through that -8% to +12% transition in the span of a few feet (intended design of 1X is to get rid of that). All the information is readily available and oversimplifying it as "front shifting, ugh it's tough!", just furthers the odd and incorrect myths surrounding this useful drive-train setup.

WalksOn2Wheels

I follow a local-ish team that rocked the 1x11 Specialized bikes when they first came out. It worked really well for them because they did a lot of crit racing. They never needed a small chainring. For a do everything road bike, it doesn't make sense. For an MTB/gravel/adventure type bike, they make a lot of sense. It would even work great on a commuter bike.

I just feel like road bike typically denotes a situation where you want the gearing to do 30+ mph at a comfortable cadence when you can, but also have the gearing for the inevitable incline.

smarkinson

Looks like Specialized has dropped the X1 Allez and the Diverge is closer to a gravel bike than a true road bike. If you're interested in the Diverge then you should probably look at some of the cyclocross bikes such as the Cannondale CAADX and Giant TCX both of which are available with 1x11 groupsets. Replace the cyclocross tyres with some road ones and off you go.

https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/tc...sx--2017--2016

CAADX Apex 1 Cannondale Bicycles

Or buy your favourite road bike but get it with the lowest spec groupset and then replace the shifters, rear derailleur and chainset with 1x11.

Or buy a bare frame and spec it however you like. You don't have to settle for what the big bike companies say you need.

faulker479

There is a Synapse with 1x11


Synapse Carbon Disc Apex Cannondale Bicycles

NYMXer

EXACTLY! This was why I wondered why anyone would want this set up for a road bike. Other styles of bikes, sure.... but a true road bike you will want more gears, not less. 2x11 is pretty close to perfect for me

PepeM

I think I could live with a 1x. Lately I've been riding my bike with a 2x7 and I can't say I've missed the extra eight gears. Losing three more wouldn't be that big of a deal either I think, especially if I could have two cassettes and change them depending on the ride I'll be doing. On the other hand, I am not sure why I would go out of my way to put myself in that situation.

TimothyH

I'm not really sure what "True" road bike means but lots of people ride single speed and fixed gear bikes on the road.

I ride 48/16 fixed on the road regularly, up to metric distances and in group rides, and I'm not talking about a clunker either - 1400 gram custom wheels, Dura Ace, Fizik, Vittoria, Thomson, etc. 1x11 seems like plenty of gears from that perspective.


-Tim-

NYMXer

I was referring to the tradition drop bar type of road bike. I know that any bike can be ridden on the road, but as far as I know, they are not called road bikes. If a bike is designed to predominately ride on the road, then that is what I call a "true" road bike.

Given the fact that (at least around my area, called the Catskill Mtns) a typical bike ride will have speeds as high as 50 descending down a hill or as slow as walking speed climbing a 12% grade, I would think that might not be best served with only 11 speeds available.

Sure, some might want a bike like that, or even a single speed like yours.... that's why manufacturers make soooo many different models, something for everyone.

TimothyH

I've hiked in the Catskill Mountains and know the area. A friend and I used to run/hike Indian Head, Sugarloaf and Plateau Mountains as fast as we could. Camped at North/South Lake, etc. The OP and I both live in Atlanta and ride in the same general vicinity. 1x11 is totally doable in our area. Areas like the Catskills and the North Georgia Mountains are the exception, not the rule.

I do consider my FG bike a drop bar road bike. I'm not doing 12% on it for any length of time but it has been on 65 mile group rides with 3000 ft climbing.




-Tim-

chong67

I currently have a 1x11 hybrid/fitness bike. I had it for 6 months now, going uphill is not a problem. I can ride really fast. I have the SRAM gear and going smaller gear, I can get down 3 gears at a time with longer pull. Going bigger gear, its just one click and as fast as you can click it will go up. I still dont see the advantage to having front derailleur. I dont have to worry about crosschain too. Its like having a Di2. Nothing to worry.

I want to get a NEW bike with this 1x11 gear. Not to get 2x9 or 3x9 and change it to 1x11 later.

chong67

Thank you. I like it. LOL

chong67

Thanks for the info. So Diverge is not a road bike. I will look elsewhere.

kbarch

That's what I was thinking.
I recently picked up a CX bike with super wide range cassette and put a decent sized chainring on it. The mega tires, for riding trails, are the main reason I got it, and aside from that I'd say it makes a pretty good road bike. However, I do see what people meanabout the big steps in gears being less than ideal for cruising along and pacelining.
I don't think a front derailleur is complicated , but it can easily be seen as an unnecessary complication (the nice kind, like the ones watch afficionados pay a pretty penny for ).