AlmostTrick

The way I understand it, as observed in other tests, larger rings are more efficient. So a 42 ring (perfect single replacement for a compact double set) would be more efficient than the 34, and less efficient than the 50... in other words a wash.

Plus, not everyone wants or needs to match the range of a 39/53 system. That for me is the real reason to run 1x. Keep close ratios within a narrower range. Why carry extra gears, complexity, and weight you don't need?

I don't see a reason to run a high tension RD on the road. None of my 1x's have one. It seems a narrow/wide chainring does the job of chain retention just fine, and doesn't add any friction to the system.

Fox Farm

I had the same reaction as you did. I use a 1x on my gravel bike but with a 44 in the front, not the tested 48 and my road bikes run 50/34 compact and not the 53/39. When I lived in Michigan (pretty flat), I took the 39 off my road crank and put a 42 on, for a 53/42 and an 11-23 cassette. Where I live now, with a lot of 12% road and trail, none of that would work.

dr_lha

My thought exactly. They couldn't at least have compared to a 2x SRAM Force setup?

My take away was that Shimano has less friction than SRAM. I’m glad my 1x bike has Shimano gears!

Steamer

Probably some truth there.

But novelty substitutes for progress very nicely in the bike world, while generating sales from all of those 'upgrades'.

If people actually worn out their stuff, the bike industry would be about 1/5th the size.

BradH

We're not the hilliest or the flattest in Nebraska, but we do have the most wind.

https://beef2live.com/story-states-least-wind-0-122176

sdmc530

I found this more interesting than the original article about 1x vs. 2x

Obeast

Triple is the way to go. I never run out of gears and my chain line always looks beautiful.

Seattle Forrest

I know why people might think SRAM 2x doesn't exist...

SCTinkering

My commuter bike is a Shimano 1x. It took a while to find a good front ring & cassette combo, but I think I'm finally there. I don't usually have hills in my commute so the spread is pretty good. My road bike will stay 2x for the foreseeable future.

Chi_Z

the weigh saving of 1x is minimal at best, you have to use a larger cassette that usually offset the weight of a FD and small chainring

redlude97

I've been doing an apples to apples comparison on my gravel bike, swapped the r8000 nonclutched RD for the rx800 clutched RD. With the clutch off I'd guess the spring is 1.5x stronger than the r8000. How much that translates to watts in the exact same gear is hard to quantify but spinning on the stand there is some noticeable drag. When the clutch is on there isn't any noticeable additional drag except when shifting where the clutch resists pedalling for a split second. Will probably leave the clutch off for road riding and only turn the clutch on for gravel. Overall happier with the shimano rx800 compared to the sram force cx1 in terms of drag and performance FWIW 1x or 2x.

PaulRivers

There's a progression:
1. New tech comes out
2. It is widely discussed

From there it goes a few different ways.

Sometimes...
3. It works well
4. Everyone adopts it
5. It becomes "boring" to talk about because it's obvious and everyone is using it
Examples: Air Filled Tires, Biking is Faster Than Jogging, Significantly Lighter Bikes Are Faster Than Significantly Heavier Bikes, Chains with oil

Or...
3. It works worse
4. Some people adopt it
5. Those people have invested mental and social energy into the new thing and try to maintain that they made a good choice by outarguing everyone else

Or...
3. It works basically the same
4. Some people adopt it
5. Those people have invested mental and social energy in the new thing and get into a status "which is better" battle over 2 things that are basically the same

When new tech actually works it gets talked about for a while then it sticks around but it's not "cool" to talk about it much any more.
When new tech doesn't provide an advantage or is even slightly worse, the arguments about it go on forever.

Psimet2001 

Eh... no it's not. It's the front shifter guts, the front cable housing, the front cable, front derail, and the inner chainring and longer chainring bolts and usually heavier crank spider. The difference in weight on the cassette isn't comparable int hat scenario. In reality the differences in weight on the cassettes of what most people run in 1x for cross is minimal at best.

Now....1x for cross eliminates quite a few failure points: breaking your front shifter, kicking in the front derail, jamming the chain, snapping your front derail cable, front cable freezing, etc.

We don't ride 1x in cross because of fashion. There is a real need. For years it was next to impossible to keep your chain from dropping while racing. Not because of any adjustment, etc but because of the bouncing around, kicking it from poor technique, etc. 1x eliminated that. In the early years of 1x I was cobbling together systems to make them work. Racers lined up to make their own home made systems. A lot of what ended up being the SRAM 1x (CX1) lineup came directly from what we were all doing here in Chicago on our cross scene as the engineers were racing beside us and watching and trying stuff as well. 1x in cross was completely groundbreaking and revolutionary to the sport - at least at the amateur levels.

I honestly believe it's a complete waste on road. It does simplify the system but it adds so much bulk that just isn't needed on the road. We're not dismounting and remounting the bikes. They aren't getting jammed up with mud. There's a reason cross 1x stuff looks like mtb stuff - it handles a lot of the same stuff. We just don't need that on the road.

Psimet2001 

Yup. This is why I hate discussing that stuff. If it's not a unilateral "wow, this is better" for almost everyone then we will always debate it. That, by its essence, means it's not as great of a change as the supporters would believe. I just wish some people would recognize that and just simply go, "I found it groundbreaking for me and I absolutely adore it and can't imagine not having it anymore," and move on. Not everyone experiences the sport int eh same way even though we try and silo them into our own factions continuously.

Marcus_Ti

No...it didn't eliminate dropped chains. Just ask Aqua Blue Sport

Lose a front mech, but you often still need a chain catcher. Lose a chainring, gain a heavier larger cassette. The amount of weight you actually save is tiny. Also Narrow wide rings tend to wear faster.

Psimet2001 

Agreed it doesn't eliminate chain drops without a chain device - never said we didn't use them all the time but I didn't include them in the comparative weight "analysis". Probably because I don't care. 1x works better for cross. You can't use a captive chain catcher unless you're running 1x and that's the only way to eliminate chain drops 100% - and it does eliminate chain drops 100%.

Like I said above though - I still think it's pretty stupid for road.

The problem that SRAM is running into though is that they have been completely hitched to the 1x ideology so much so that I now have to correct riders and customers when talking about groups because they'll say something like, "yeah I thought about the AXS group but I don't want to go 1x" - "You know it's also a 2x group don't you?" "It is? I had no idea." No good can come from not emphasizing that fact to the public. They even talk about the front derail change to allow for greater clearance for wider tires but still people come away from the marketing thinking it's only available as 1x.

Fun story - was walking the pro area at Jingle Cross a couple of years back. Wanted to say hey to Ellen Noble (long story but we kinda of Internet know each other) so I walk over to the Rapha tent and sidestep the line for Jeremy Powers. Ellen goes, "HEY Rob! Nice to see you!" We start talking a bunch and right in the middle of this a friend of mine from SRAM who is a fellow racer here and an engineering manager or head of engineering there is hanging in their compound and sees me. "HEY ROB - What have you been seeing int he pits with all the mud here". He just cut in and keeps going. Ellen looks at me like "OK.....I guess we're done" and mouths "bye/nice seeing you" and walks away.

Turns out he left his chain fall device sitting at home on the table. Sure enough the mud pushed the chain up and off the ring and he was left there scrambling during his race to get it back on. "You know everyone is starting at me fighting this chain and thinking to themselves about how this was supposed to solve all that but I've always told people the only way you can prevent it from happening is to use a chain device. I've never said otherwise. I just forgot mine."