New posts

Math nerdery, gears.... (The Truth About 11-Speed)

March 26, 2014, 7:06 a.m.
Posts: 131
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

Article here: The Truth About 11-Speed

what you fail to account for in your argument, Morgan, and I know you love directing this argument at me, is that there is an overall loss of range in a 1x system because you have to basically choose to lose versatility on one end or the other. to match gear inches of a 24x36 on the climbing side you need to run 28x42, but then you lose all your top end speed and power as a 28x10 gives you significantly less gear inches than a 36x11….start bumping up your chainring size on a 1x to get a bit more top end and you lose your climbability, at least in places where steep tech climbing happens a lot. And no, having to change your chainring all the time for different places is not a solution, who wants to be swapping rings all the time? they make these handy things called derailleurs that work really well and give you a variety of gearing options, at your finger tips! I'd also argue that because people run such small chainrings, while the gear spread may be the same on the cogset, the gear inches are actually pretty close so you end up feeling like you need to shift more to get into a useable gear, double shift up/down, etc….

Why can't 1x apologists accept that it isn't a cure all for all riders? why the obsession with everyone getting on board the 1x train? why do you care so much that some people actually find 2x systems useful and appropriate in most situations?

edit to add… :) you knew I'd rise to this provocative article!

March 26, 2014, 7:12 a.m.
Posts: 6449
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

golf clap

preach it, brother :)

March 26, 2014, 7:47 a.m.
Posts: 2002
Joined: April 2, 2005

so much text. playing around with ritzelrechner.de is so much more informative…

MTB-Freeride.TV

March 26, 2014, 8:27 a.m.
Posts: 136
Joined: Nov. 18, 2003

playing around with ritzelrechner.de is so much more informative…

That's such a cool site! Thanks for the link!

March 26, 2014, 8:45 a.m.
Posts: 452
Joined: April 11, 2011

I love 1x. It's creating some fantastic deals in 2x!

March 26, 2014, 10:02 a.m.
Posts: 4300
Joined: June 24, 2010

what you fail to account for in your argument, Morgan, and I know you love directing this argument at me, is that there is an overall loss of range in a 1x system because you have to basically choose to lose versatility on one end or the other. to match gear inches of a 24x36 on the climbing side you need to run 28x42, but then you lose all your top end speed and power as a 28x10 gives you significantly less gear inches than a 36x11….start bumping up your chainring size on a 1x to get a bit more top end and you lose your climbability, at least in places where steep tech climbing happens a lot. And no, having to change your chainring all the time for different places is not a solution, who wants to be swapping rings all the time? they make these handy things called derailleurs that work really well and give you a variety of gearing options, at your finger tips! I'd also argue that because people run such small chainrings, while the gear spread may be the same on the cogset, the gear inches are actually pretty close so you end up feeling like you need to shift more to get into a useable gear, double shift up/down, etc….

Why can't 1x apologists accept that it isn't a cure all for all riders? why the obsession with everyone getting on board the 1x train? why do you care so much that some people actually find 2x systems useful and appropriate in most situations?

edit to add… :) you knew I'd rise to this provocative article!

I vividly remember when you delivered this sermon on the mount last fall. Don't underestimate your ability to provoke opinionated editorial pieces! (I just have to ride around doing math in my head until the spark of the idea comes along…)

Your criticisms of the 10-42's 420% range are valid and I've always acknowledged that, but what about the idea of a 49 tooth? I wrote that just for you, buddy!

flickr

March 26, 2014, 10:09 a.m.
Posts: 2
Joined: July 21, 2008

I agree with flip. That and a 49 tooth cog wouldn't fit with existing derailluers anyways. Although I'm sure shimano and sram would love to R[HTML_REMOVED]D it then turn around and charge us 2g or more for their 12 speeds.

I love my single ring set up on the shore.

Let the lycra crowd obsess over missing gears.

March 26, 2014, 10:35 a.m.
Posts: 1141
Joined: Dec. 16, 2008

Yup. I'm not an elite or strong rider by any stretch of the imagination, (even mine), but a 30t up front with the 42t added to my XT cassette works well for me here on Seymour and Fromme.

I went from the 24x36 as my uber granny gear (.67) to a 30x42 (.71).

This puts me right between my old granny 24x36 (.67) and the next harder gear 24x32 (.75)

I don't have QUITE the same ease, but it hasn't stopped me yet. I've actually gotten better at tackling Old Buck since I've made the change. Damned Old Buck…

And, as the article mentions, many riders hardly ever use the 11t cog. I'm one of those people.

March 26, 2014, 10:39 a.m.
Posts: 8
Joined: Oct. 7, 2013

I rode a 1x8 for 12 years and then I bought a 2x10 and for the first week I thought I was in heaven.

But then having to choose between the noise and drag of a chain retention device, or the chain-slapping noise and risk of derailment without, I realized that I still detest the front derailleur. Not to mention the front derailleur, no matter how well tuned, still doesn't shift as cleanly as the rear.

I am now riding a 30t front with a 1x10 with a 42t wolf cog. Happy happy happy…

That said, I am just a "mountain biker", I don't race XC or do downhill races…

March 26, 2014, 10:44 a.m.
Posts: 166
Joined: April 27, 2010

Your criticisms of the 10-42's 420% range are valid and I've always acknowledged that, but what about the idea of a 49 tooth? I wrote that just for you, buddy!

While a 49 tooth would match the range of a 2x10, would that start to introduce some issues with the two bigger jumps being at the easiest end of the range, where smaller increments are likely to be needed more by people looking for jut the right gear for a specific climb?

I'd think that for most riders (i.e. not gravity focussed racers) bigger jumps would be less noticeable towards the other end of the range, where they will tend to be focussing more on the trail than on the their pedalling. Although I'd imagine that bigger jumps in smaller cogs would be much harder to get shifting smoothly and reliably.

March 26, 2014, 10:58 a.m.
Posts: 2
Joined: July 21, 2008

On a slight tangent, I think an op opportunity exists for a company like one up to produce is own 10 sp cassette 11-13-15-18-21-24-28-33-36-42

I really appreciated not have to drop a grand to get a 42 tooth cog. The big players could use more competition in the all mountain market.

March 26, 2014, 11 a.m.
Posts: 809
Joined: Dec. 22, 2002

Doesn't this article need to acknowledge wheel diameter effect on gearing? If you worried about 1x range, that concern will vary based on which of 3 wheel size you pick. There's likely a Sheldon article on it already….so if lazy just link it?

There's some non- mathy stuff that matters, but not being said. Rock out on 29x2.35 on wider rims [HTML_REMOVED] 50mm stem and try to spin out on the level ground. As you get past 26-27km/h, you start to feel the resistance of the rubber and wind push back. Diminishing returns for the pedal input. So Flip sweating the 27-10 gear capability in that situation is a bit moot.

On the climbs needing 24-36 in a 2x setup - you'll never build the power a la SS riders if you have this bailout and use it. Stand [HTML_REMOVED] deliver, keep the bike sub 30lbs and watch the min speed for wheel momentum conservation…so much more rewarding than trying to do the hamster wheel in 24-36 just to say you didn't walk it (which is no slower).

YMMV

NSMBA member.

March 26, 2014, 11:11 a.m.
Posts: 4300
Joined: June 24, 2010

While a 49 tooth would match the range of a 2x10, would that start to introduce some issues with the two bigger jumps being at the easiest end of the range, where smaller increments are likely to be needed more by people looking for jut the right gear for a specific climb?

I'd think that for most riders (i.e. not gravity focussed racers) bigger jumps would be less noticeable towards the other end of the range, where they will tend to be focussing more on the trail than on the their pedalling. Although I'd imagine that bigger jumps in smaller cogs would be much harder to get shifting smoothly and reliably.

I've used Sheldon's gear calculator to mock up a 12-speed 49 tooth setup. As you can see the difference in gear between 49 and 42 – 16.7% – is the same as the current jump between 42 and 36, 28 and 24, 21 and 18.

The 20% jump down at the bottom end is a bigger issue, but without that extra tooth the total gear range of the 11-speed system is significantly smaller… 382% vs 420%.

flickr

March 26, 2014, 11:14 a.m.
Posts: 2
Joined: July 21, 2008

As I was reading Morgan's post, I was hearing Sheldon Cooper's voice in my head.

March 26, 2014, 11:17 a.m.
Posts: 6449
Joined: Nov. 19, 2002

\
On the climbs needing 24-36 in a 2x setup - you'll never build the power a la SS riders if you have this bailout and use it. Stand [HTML_REMOVED] deliver, keep the bike sub 30lbs and watch the min speed for wheel momentum conservation…so much more rewarding than trying to do the hamster wheel in 24-36 just to say you didn't walk it (which is no slower).

I can think of alot of situations on technical singletrack where "stand and deliver" would simply equal a loss of traction and a knee hammering into the stem. Fun. On a fireroad climb it's not hard to crank up the hill in a hard gear, though.

Maybe we can agree that climbing style is very subjective and while a 1x setup with a small chainring and 42t cog will get you up a hill nearly as well as a granny setup…there's the whole other side of the coin which involves going fast on your way back down the hill.

My argument is that a 30t (or 28t or even a 32t for that matter) single ring is really fucking pinner. If you want to coast down the hill then that's fine but if you're wanting to get some power into the pedals to go fast on the way down I just don't see how a tiny chainring will cut it. I'm running a 24/38 split up front with a 12-36 spread in the back. On descents I spend the majority of a ride in the bottom end of my cassette, and yes I'm riding trails with as many rocks, roots and steeps as the North Shore offers on a pinner bike to boot, not just spinning buff trails.

I'll happily "hamster wheel" myself up a hill if it means I'm not likely to run out of gearing on the way back down. But even though I'm on a 30lb "AM" (enduro?) bike my rides are still all about going fast on the way down so YMMV.

Forum jump: