4 Reasons to run OneUp Shark

Words Andrew Major
Photos Andrew Major
Date Oct 20, 2016

OneUp Shark

I like the massive gear range a front derailleur offers. I like simple 1x drivetrains. By extension I should love OneUp Shark as it combines the best qualities of both? Sort of.

In all honesty, I had to chew through my aversion to the marketing behind the new 500% gear range 1x setups, OneUp Shark and SRAM Eagle, to give them a fair chance. They are not panacea by any means. And yet I’ve got four reasons to run them, not run from them.

OneUp Shark

The OneUp Shark 50t cog isn’t that big… relatively speaking.

Wait, what is OneUp Shark and SRAM Eagle? Check out the NSMB.com introductions. You can read about Shark here and Eagle here and here.

Santa Cruz Nomad

The Santa Cruz Nomad is the perfect OneUp Shark test platform because it isn’t front derailleur compatible. There’s also the fact the Nomad’s suspension works best if you don’t use a granny-sized chainring. The bike is efficient enough, and light enough, that it isn’t an excuse to avoid big all day rides. The rides that are a lot more pleasant with some low, low gears.

Lastly, the Nomad gets up to speed quickly even on tighter janky North Shore trails. Suspension performance aside, it benefits from having a higher gear than a 28-30t ring provides.

OneUp Shark

Our long term Santa Cruz Nomad’s VPP dual link setup sacrifices front derailleur compatibility for frame stiffness, suspension geometry, and chainstay length. It has all around chops that benefit greatly from the wide range of high and low gears that OneUp Shark delivers.

No Front Derailleur Compatibility

There are an ever-increasing number of bikes that are not compatible with front derailleurs. The reasons are myriad, from short stays, to massive tire clearance, to frame stiffness but the end result is the same.

For local riding I generally find a 28t or 30t ring up front with an 11-36t cassette is perfectly usable. That’s location dependent though and on massive days on the bike or in faster locales with wide-open terrain the gear range is definitely lacking at both the top and bottom end. For bigger and or faster days I love being able to grab or dump a huge range via a well adjusted front derailleur. I know that isn’t cool. Tough.

At my fitness level, big days on the Nomad call for an easier gear than a 30 x 36t. At the same time anywhere I could get the bike up to speed I was using the high end of the cassette with a OneUp 34t ring. Shark to the rescue as it improves riding the Nomad at both ends of the gearing range.

OneUp Shark

Chain retention is another factor to consider. All the security of a narrow-wide ring and a top guide with the massive range of a 2x setup.

Chain Security

A bike like the Nomad can be ridden hard and fast. I won’t pretend to have explored the full capabilities of the bike but it definitely makes the most of its suspension on chundered out trails and I could push the bike harder than normal in those situations.

The combination of the Shimano XT clutch that the Shark cage was installed on, the OneUp narrow-wide ring, and a OneUp upper chain guide added a high degree of chain security compared to a 2x system with a clutch.

Riding in a place like Moab where having a selection of low gears for crawling up long steep pitches at altitude along with high gears and chain retention to rip down massive high speed runs like the Whole Enchilada, the argument for Shark is strong. Likewise for a less fit rider trying to make the most of a big travel bike in an Enduro race.

The weight savings from removing a ring, front derailleur, cable, housing, and shifter was part of the inital appeal of 1x systems. Running a massive 50t cog on an 11spd or 12spd system not only negates some of the savings, it is also unsprung weight. (Photo: OneUp)

Suspension Performance

One of the most common negative opinions I hear about Shark and Eagle is the additional unsprung weight. Basically, moving the weight of a front derailleur and granny ring on a 2x system onto the rear wheel to get the same gear range with a 1x system. Unsprung weight is bad for suspension performance.

The flip side is of course that most suspension designs function optimally within a small range of chainring sizes and designers tune these bikes around a certain sized ring. Santa Cruz’s VPP suspension system is a great example of a design that does not perform as well with the chain angle of a granny gear compared to a ‘middle’ sized chainring.

Pete_SC_Nomad_NSMB_KazYamamura-8

All the low gears I need to climb without the negatives to suspension performance from running a tiny front ring. Suspension performance outweighs any gain in unsprung weight. Rider: Pete / Photo: Kaz Yamamura

A great way to test this is on a bike with a 2x drivetrain using Sheldon Brown’s gear calculator. Find an equivalent gear in both chainring sizes, an easy example is 36t x 36t and 24t x 24t, and then attack the same climb and coast the same descent in both gears.

For many suspension bikes the benefits of riding in a larger chainring, vs a granny ring, overcomes the negatives of the increased unsprung weight.

Spank Spike Bar

On aggressive rolling terrain I use my dropper post remote way more than my front derailleur.

Dropper Post Remote

On aggressive rolling terrain I use my dropper post remote way more than my front derailleur. I would much rather have my dropper post remote optimized for ergonomics.

On my own bikes when I run 2x I have my cake and eat it too by running my dropper in the front shifter position and my front derailleur using a thumb shifter. That’s probably a bit esoteric for the average rider.

Shark provides the gear range you can achieve with a front derailleur and optimum dropper post remote ergonomics.

OneUp Shark

Why not Shark?

Why not Shark?

Even in the example of the Nomad, optimum test platform for OneUp Shark that it is, there are a couple of niggles worth noting. Firstly, being tied to a Shimano XT drivetrain, backpedaling in the three largest cogs will cause the chain to derail. This effect is accentuated on the Nomad as the rear DT Swiss hub has a huge 20-degree range for engagement using the standard 18t ratchets. It isn’t an issue for everyone, but I regularly backpedal to set up for technical sections and it was a notable negative for me.

Wear is another issue. Sort of. With a 34t up front and the Nomad’s ‘sit and spin’ climbing preference I am definitely in the 46t and 50t cogs anytime the climbs get steep and technical. Compared to my other experiences with Shimano 11spd I’m going to need a new cassette, or at least a new big cog, much sooner with Shark. The trade off is in the Nomad friendly high gears when the going gets fast.

SRAM Eagle

Shark vs. Eagle. SRAMs 500% gear ratio 12spd system. Photo: Dave Smith

Shark Vs. Eagle

Having ridden both OneUp Shark and SRAM Eagle I want to make a couple of observations.

The SRAM Eagle drivetrain does shift and feel like a more polished system. I don’t think that’s surprising given that Eagle was designed as a complete groupset whereas OneUp is building an aftermarket add-on to Shimano’s 11spd drivetrains. But I think it bears noting.

The true beauty of OneUp Shark is the value of being able to buy a Shimano SLX or XT spec’d bike and achieve the equivalent 1x gear range of Eagle at a lower price and what many riders would argue is a longer usable life.

OneUp-Components-10T-Cluster-50T-Shark-M700-Cassette-966

To get the full 500% range a OneUp kit that replaces the high gears is also required along with a specific, shorter, freehub body that works with certain hubs. 11T-50T, instead of 10T-50T, is still an impressive usable range.

Shark Me?

Whether a 1x convert pining for a wider gear range or a 2x holdout lusting for a new frame with no front derailleur compatibility OneUp Shark is an answer. Combined with a wide range 11spd Shimano SLX drivetrain it provides an awesome value and matches the widest gear range available.

For more on Shark and other OneUp bits click here…


Are you hanging onto your front changer?

Comments

slimshady76
0
Luix  - Oct. 21, 2016, 5:49 a.m.

So I don't want to be "that guy", but having to change almost 30% of your brand new drivetrain -counting on the cassette bits and derailleur cage- only to have 90% of SRAM's gearing seems pretty lame. And not even getting rid of the backpedal issues speaks of a poorly designed transmission…

Seems like Shimano needs a couple more iterations on their 1x offerings to be on par with SRAM. And I say this with a mixed transmission: I'm currently running a X1 rear derailleur/GX shifter/Shimano XT M8000 11-42 cassette. The backpedal issue isn't that pronounced as in a pure Shimano transmission. I ride regularly with a friend who has a full XT M8000 transmission in his hardtail, and he can't backpedal at all in the larger cogs, while I get maybe a 50-50 chance of chain dropping from the larger cogs in my AM dula suspension rig. I learned too late those XT (now renamed SLX) cassettes had their bigger cog too far inboard, as the OneUp guys point below. So my next cassete would either be a SRAM NX or a Sunrace MX8.

So, in a nutshell, why would anyone start with an expensive, poorly performing transmission, and then throw even more money on aftermarket products just to have an at most decent experience? I get SRAM might not be your cup of tea, but BOX is coming up with a Shimano compatible rear derailleur which might be worth lookig at.

Don't get me wrong, I thank OneUp for offering a viable solution, but for the mother of Jeebus, Shimano, get your sh*t together before trying to catch up on SRAM!

Reply

kirk
0
Kirk  - Oct. 20, 2016, 12:17 p.m.

Can anyone elaborate on the downsides to suspension performance with a small ring up front? I've heard it many times but never with a simple description of what happens. Seems like less weight (smaller rings up front and out back), along with shorter derailleur cages = more better. I'm one of those guys who doesn't get into the 10/11 much, so looking to go smaller up front.

Reply

xeren
0
xeren  - Oct. 20, 2016, 12:35 p.m.

the video gives a pretty decent idea- the smaller the front ring, the more pedal kickback you get on descents (at least, with this suspension design)

Reply

david-mills
0
David Mills  - Oct. 21, 2016, 8:07 a.m.

Thanks for posting that link!

Reply

Dirk
0
Dirk  - Oct. 21, 2016, 9:19 a.m.

It's a function of diameters - If you have 1″ of chain growth, it will cause a smaller chaingring to rotate more than a larger chainring. So this will hold for all suspension designs.

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 21, 2016, 12:20 p.m.

Just to clarify, it will hold true for all suspension designs but the negative effects are significantly more pronounced on some bikes than others. Presumably ones that have the most chain growth right around the optimal sag point of their suspension design.

It would be interesting to see how friction clutches negatively impact different suspension designs since a bi-product of their function is to resist chain growth.

Reply

andy-eunson
0
Andy Eunson  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:31 a.m.

I've had XX1 on two bikes now with no backpedal issue. Last summer I went with XTR derailleur and shifter with XT 11-42 cassette and had the issue. I had a Chromag 30 tooth ring which has more offset than the Raceface. Then I went to a One Up oval 30 and their simple guide. When I went to replace the XT chain for the third time on the same drivetrain I found the 42 looked really worn so I changed the cassette and got the XTR chain. Same ring. Did not look worn so perhaps One Up's claim that their guide reduces ring wear is true. No more backpedal issue either.

I found with double rings that I was melting the small ring in short order and not using the big ring that much. I was using a 24-36 Raceface set up on one bike and XTR 26-38 on another. The XTR had better wear characteristics than the Raceface.

Reply

vonp
0
VonP  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:47 a.m.

i've made the conversion from 2x to 1x and have run both 40T (OneUp) and 42T Shimano (after a full conversion to 11spd) on my Surface.

i'm shocked at how quickly i'm going through drivetrains. Since December 2015, i'm on my third cassette and second chainring. i ride 3 or 4 times a week, and do a reasonable amount of climbing on each ride (500 to 800m). i realize this is part of it, but i am still surprised by the frequency of investing in new bits. i can only imagine it would be even worse with Shark.

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:58 a.m.

I don't see how Shark would be worse? Are you thinking chainline issues will increase wear?

I definitely noticed I wear out cassettes faster with a 1x system (any 1x system). It makes sense as the loaded pedalling (grinding uphill) is concentrated on fewer cogs than with a 2x system where in the granny a wider range of the cassette is usable climbing.

I know two riders well who have gone back to 2x (one with a FD and one manually shifting between a NW 36t and NW 26t because he likes chain retention and lack of front shifter) for specifically the wear issue you note.

It can be a total PIA. But in the shop I had good results just replacing the upper cluster on Shimano XT and XTR cassettes for riders who wore out those cogs but otherwise had pristine cassettes.

Reply

vonp
0
VonP  - Oct. 20, 2016, 10:06 a.m.

the Surface with a FD gets the job done, but the Surface without the FD gets the job done and looks sexy while doing it. 🙂 so, i'm not going back. that trick of replacing the upper clusters is interesting, one that neither myself or my shop has considered. thanks!

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:07 a.m.

If you don't need the high end gears and given it's a hardtail and so there's no suspension consideration, I know quite a few people running N/W 28t and 26t rings for their 1x setups which would also help spread the work out over your cassette.

Reply

cooper
0
Cooper Quinn  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:49 p.m.

But good lord, you can't go more than 8mph with a 26t before you're spun out….

Reply

oneup
0
OneUp  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:09 a.m.

One of the big advantages to larger rear cogs is better wear. The effect is two-fold. Larger front rings mean a lower chain tension. Larger rear cogs mean that that chain tension is spread across a larger number of teeth.

Reply

vonp
0
VonP  - Oct. 20, 2016, 10:04 a.m.

glad i mentioned it. and glad to have my assumption de-bunked. since im making these changes on the regular, it couldn't hurt to try out the Shark system.

Reply

brian
0
Brian Goldstone  - Oct. 20, 2016, 12:48 p.m.

Sure, but huge cogs require the material to be faster wearing aluminum. Smaller diameter steel cogs are still longer wearing than these big aluminum pieplates.

Reply

sean
0
Sean  - Oct. 20, 2016, 5:55 p.m.

I'd pay a premium for a stainless Shark giant cog and stainless oval direct mount chain ring.

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - Oct. 20, 2016, 7:48 a.m.

I'm currently running a XX1 setup with a 42 big cog. The cassette is worn out and I need to replace it. I looked at the Wolf Tooth 49T SRAM cog for a minute, but the weight of the NX cassette and the cog are significant. E.13 offers a complete cassette with 44T big cog that is substantially lighter than the WT option. So far that's where I am headed. My XX1 shifter and derailleur have a few more years of life left in them so I need to stick with XX1 compatible options.

Any other suggestions for replacing an XX1 cassette?

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:03 a.m.

$ + quality wise (ignoring weights) over the long term I'd be tempted to switch the XD driver to a Shimano and run an XT 11spd cassette.

Not a sexy choice I know and not light. But the quality, price, longevity, etc is probably the best?

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:19 a.m.

I don't want to ignore weight. This is my first truly light bike [for its class] and it's such a pleasure to ride I'm not adding extra weight if possible. That said I'm not counting each gram. The E.13 option is a bit heavier than the existing XX1 cassette.

Also my XX1 derailleur and shifter and still going strong so I don't want to bin them and buy new parts this go round. Once I've worn out the new cassette and a few chains I'll be reading for a whole new drivetrain next time around.

Reply

pete@nsmb.com
0
Pete Roggeman  - Oct. 20, 2016, 10:18 a.m.

The e.13 route offers the added option of being replaceable in modular parts, so if you experience wear in one section of the cassette, you can replace it more frequently and keep the others. Definitely seems like a good consideration for you.

Reply

slimshady76
0
Luix  - Oct. 21, 2016, 5:52 a.m.

The XT wears its big cog pretty fast. And if you have the unfortunate chance of getting a first-gen cassette (the ones getting sold really cheap now), you might find yourself chipping its teeth away, even in the steel cogs.

Reply

oneup
0
OneUp  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:11 a.m.

Is the entire cassette worn or just the 42T. If it's just the 42T you can replace just that sprocket with our 44T X-cog.

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:16 a.m.

Entire cassette is worn. That's 3 seasons [6 months+/yr] I've nursed the XX1 cassette along. If it was just the 42T cog I'd replace just that. For my coastal BC riding I find I use the big 4 cogs 95% of the time, but there is no way to replace them separately.

Reply

tehllama42
0
Tehllama42  - Oct. 21, 2016, 9:23 a.m.

… making the E13 an undeniably sexy option in your case. If the 9-46T is better, then that seems like the winner.
For an out of the box, or converting an XT cassette equivalent, I can see the value of the Shark setup for other folks.
For me personally, I'd find myself looking at taking a new XT that is set up for 11-46T and swapping to the e13 [since the stock wheels on virtually every bike I'm looking at are placeholders at best].

Reply

0
uncle duke  - Oct. 20, 2016, 7:28 a.m.

the chain falls off when you back pedal? no sale.

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - Oct. 20, 2016, 7:43 a.m.

That's a chainline issue that can affect a lot of bikes, but definitely shorter CS make it worse. If you have a splined crank [ie. Race Face Turbine] you can get rings for it with various offsets that allow you to tune the chainline. Personally I'd far rather have short CS and have to tune my chainline this way than long CS and be able to slap anything on my bike with no issues.

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 7:50 a.m.

CS on Nomad is not particularly short by current standards?

I have had good results on some drivetrains by spacing the ring inboard.

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - Oct. 20, 2016, 7:57 a.m.

Are you asking in a ~17″ CS on a 275er is short by current standards? If so I'd call it "normal" compared to other bikes of its ilk. That said it's short in absolute terms when you look at the width of an 11 speed cassette and how far over the chain needs to move in that distance.

If you can space the ring inboard you are tuning the chainline just like using a ring with a different offset. That will improve the back pedalling situation in the big cogs. As I buy new rings I'm sticking with rings that have less offset which accomplishes the same thing since I don't have any spacers in my crank/BB I can't move the ring over any other way.

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:11 a.m.

Hi Vic,

Yes. Historically 17″ CS is fairly short but I was thinking that is probably average now (many 29'ers are even in the territory). Normal as you say. I just regularly hear ~ "short stays exasperate the problem" but my thinking is there are few current bikes that wouldn't be considered short.

Totally the same, as you say, re. spacing 4-bolt ring vs. new DM ring except that spacing out a ring does allow some level of (cheap) experimentation.

On the Nomad (RF Crank / OneUp DM ring) there is really no space to move the ring anyways (right up against chainguide/bash taco) and being a 34t Oval clearance with the rear triangle would be a factor even if it was run sans guide.

Still. Always interesting what people are doing for work arounds.

Thanks!

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:32 a.m.

I'm still running an 8-9yr old bike in the winter so even if the bikes available today mostly have shorter CS that doesn't mean most bikes being ridden do. Not everyone is dumping a mountain bike after 2-3yrs.

If people want frames with the shortest possible CS that will fit the widest possible tires there will be compromises like how the chainline looks in the biggest cogs, wider hubs and wider BBs/Q-factor.

We really are pushing bike designers very hard of several fronts at the moment.

Reply

oneup
0
OneUp  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:16 a.m.

To help clarify, the issue is with the chain dropping from the 42T to the 37T on the Shimano cassette. This is a Shimano issue. The Shark kit helps this issue by moving the 42T farther outboard. Since this affects all Shimano 11-42 cassettes we have also created a kit for people who are happy with the range of the 11-42 but want to improve the backpedal drop.

The 18T + spacer kit moves the cassette 4mm outboard to improve the issue. Swapping the stock Shimano chain to our custom Black TiN YBN chains also improves the issue.

http://can.oneupcomponents.com/collections/products/products/18t-sprocket- spacer-1×11

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:20 a.m.

Thanks for engaging guys! The Nomad definitely dumps the chain in the 50t as well (hanger is straight, cassette is tight etc).

We do have a Shimano 11spd chain on it. Do you think a OneUp chain would help?

Thanks,

Reply

oneup
0
OneUp  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:27 a.m.

That is strange, although I can't say we've had a Nomad here to test. OneUp or SRAM chain will definitely help. The inner width of the outer links is quite wide on Shimano (and KMC) chain. This allows the chain to move outboard and shift back down the cassettes upshift ramps.

Reply

brian-williams
0
Brian Williams  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:18 p.m.

Already have chain coming off backpedaling with a stock shimano 11-42 11sp. Exacerbated by the 422mm chainstays on my bike i'm sure, but the chainline in the lowest gear is so abysmal (with a RF turbine 1x crank, i think chainline is 50.5 on those like shimano) i'm seriously considering going back to 2×9 next year. Even on alpine rides when you're hike-a-bike and the chain is in the lowest gear, the quarter or half turn backpedal from the pedals hitting brush is enough to derail the chain so you spend all day spinning the pedals forward to get the chain back on before you get back on the bike. F modern 1x.

Reply

Vikb
0
Vik Banerjee  - Oct. 22, 2016, 10:38 a.m.

You can buy chain rings with less offset for your RF crank to move the chain inboard and improve your chainline in the lowest gears. Wolf Tooth and Garbaruk are two options I am aware of.

Reply

justincase
0
justincase  - Oct. 23, 2016, 8:35 a.m.

I just run 2×10(595%) 24/36 11/40 more range than 1x and you can still have a clutch rder

Reply

hbelly13
0
Raymond Epstein  - Oct. 20, 2016, 5:44 a.m.

I am looking forward to employing what I affectionately have dubbed the "Vulture" drive train. You employ a SRAM GX or NX 11 speed shifter/derailleur combo, a Sunrace 11-46 cassette and Wolf Tooth 49t cog. In doing so, you end up with SRAM system that is only 2% shy of the Eagle's range, barely a latte's weight difference at nearly a quarter of the cost all without the need of an XD driver.

Reply

tashi
0
tashi  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:55 a.m.

I like your thinking, but based on my experience with the SunRace cassette, a Shimano or SRAM cassette will perform better than the SunRace. SLX is likely priced similar to the SunRace. I like my 10-speed wide range (42t) SunRace, but there have been some durability and performance compromises made vs. a Shimano one.

Reply

hbelly13
0
Raymond Epstein  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:15 a.m.

I love a good hack. I have a number of friends that have been running the Sunrace 11-42 10 speed cassette with GX 10 speed kits. A bunch of them are local hot foot top five enduro and DH racers that have had zero problems with them. The Sunrace cassettes cost less than the XT ones and weigh less (definitely less than the NX) as well. Wolf Tooth said that they have had great results with this route too. The 42t cogs that came out a few years ago for 10 speed cassettes have worked flawlessly for me and I expect this one to work nicely too. We'll see.

Reply

oneup
0
OneUp  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:21 a.m.

This is definitely an option. A few things to note.

  • The 11-49T is 11% short of Eagle not 2%
  • The cassette progression isn't ideal going from 40 to 46 to 49T. You'd be better off using the 11-42T as a starting point.

Good luck with your setup.

Reply

hbelly13
0
Raymond Epstein  - Oct. 20, 2016, 9:36 a.m.

I guess what I meant to imply is that at the top end there is a 2% difference b/t a 49t and a 50t cog. I cannot recall where I read it, but there was some stat saying that the actual rider time/use of smallest cog (10t for SRAM or even 9t for the E13) was very low. I know personally I do not use it that much as the bulk of my wear occurs in the middle to largest one third of the gear range. My question is while it would seem that a jump of 3 teeth (46 to 49) would be smoother than one of seven (42 to 49), the folks at Wolf Tooth have echoed your statement.

Reply

oneup
0
OneUp  - Oct. 20, 2016, 10:08 a.m.

If you don't use the 10T you might look at dropping your front ring size to help yourself use more of the cassette. It's better to look at cassette jumps in terms of percentage instead of teeth. 46-49 is a 6.5% jump. That is significantly smaller than the jump on any stock cassette except perhaps a roadie straight block. 42-49 is a pretty standard 16.7% which is the same as the jump from 36-42 on a stock XX1 cassette.

Reply

poo-stance
0
Poo Stance  - Oct. 29, 2016, 1:57 p.m.

Consider specing an X.0 shifter. I've run many 10spd and now 11 spd versions on my bikes over the years. Never an issue with them and the physical feel of the shifter is better than the less expensive options. Plus the chances of a damaged shifter are far less than that of a rear mech. I await the day when bicycle companies up spec the shifters rather than the rear mech, but I won't hold my breathe for it.

Reply

kavurider
0
KavuRider  - Oct. 20, 2016, 4:28 a.m.

I hear about this back pedaling issue with Shark quite a bit, but I have not had that problem. Running it on a 2010 Intense attached VP. I too often backpedal to set up for a technical section or to do a pedal kick up a ledge. Shifting is smooth, love the extra range of the 50T and being able to run a 34T ring up front.

Only negative I've had is that the upgraded derailleur cage hangs very low on a 26″ bike. I've tagged it on rocks a few times already, seems to be pretty stout, but time will tell.

All in all, I think it's a great upgrade.

Reply

zigak
0
ZigaK  - Oct. 20, 2016, 3:55 a.m.

Did you have the same backpedaling issue with the Eagle? Or is this more of a cs length problem?

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 6:54 a.m.

I did not have the same issue with Eagle. Everyone I've talked to whose ridden Eagle, on any bike, has not experienced the issue.

I've only ridden Shark on the Nomad so I can only comment on this setup (CS length) personally.

Reply

pete@nsmb.com
0
Pete Roggeman  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:28 a.m.

Let's throw a different rear wheel on there and see if it's any different.

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:38 a.m.

It's still going to derail backpedaling… There's just a possibility - theoretically - that it will be less frequent, maybe, sometimes, possibly because a rider doesn't have to backpedal as far to find a gear when ratcheting?

I'll see if I have some 36t ratchets around to try.

Reply

poo-stance
0
Poo Stance  - Oct. 29, 2016, 2 p.m.

I have chain derailment issues when back-pedalling a X.01 equipped hardtail. Have a 36t ratchet in the hub as well. 😐

Reply

pete@nsmb.com
0
Pete Roggeman  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:28 a.m.

I've ridden Eagle on 6 or 7 different bikes now, and never experienced a backpedaling disengagement. However I was riding that Nomad before Andrew had it, and was having the issue. It didn't outweigh the benefits of Shark (for me) but it was certainly there, on that bike, with that setup.

Reply

tuskalooa
0
tuskalooa  - Oct. 20, 2016, 1:04 a.m.

2x systems? Most manufacturers seem to have dispensed with a provision for a front mech. Shouldn't this be compared to pinion gearboxes especially if one is going to start talking about unsprung weight etc? Just feel the article is a bit dated.

Reply

drewm
0
DrewM  - Oct. 20, 2016, 6:57 a.m.

Pinion has done a really impressive job marketing their system. I'd suggest since 99.9% of bikes aren't compatible with Pinion Shark and Eagle have a lot of relevance to a lot of riders.

Re. 2x. Lots of riders still use front der. It's my preference so of course I think it's relative - at least as relevant as gearboxes - but maybe it's only relevant to compare it to other 1x drivetrains?

Thanks for reading and engaging!

Reply

pete@nsmb.com
0
Pete Roggeman  - Oct. 20, 2016, 8:31 a.m.

2x drivetrains are still widely used and sold in Europe and elsewhere even if memorial services are being held for them here in North America. Pinion is nowhere near a level of market adoption that could be considered relevant - yet. Unsprung weight is not as big a part of this conversation as it would be if we were discussing pinion, but Andrew is thorough, and it is a factor.

Reply

poo-stance
0
Poo Stance  - Oct. 29, 2016, 2:04 p.m.

My largest hangup with Pinion at the moment is the twist shifter. I'd be in the "strongly consider" camp if Pinion or another company developed a trigger shifter.
Effigear is apparently compatible with X.0 trigger shifters now.

Reply

Please log in to leave a comment.

Trending on NSMB