as it says really! thanks…….

pro
Bash gaurd
less faff
dont wince when you take teeth off the big ring
no more chain ring bites in the leg

cons
lower top speed

I miss a big ring on a night ride up here if we do lots of road but apart from that 2 is fine moving up to do 22-34/36 will also help

22/36 here

Big gap between chainrings – you have to use it differently – I use it as a low and high ratio set so go onto the granny ring at the bottom of most climbs and use 1-6 in granny

You only lose the top gear or two compared with a triple.

An in an XC sense:
Pros
Lower Q factor, better chainline, lower weight, less duplicated ratios.

Cons
Smaller range, more expensive, less replacement chainrings.

I found all pro’s (maybe a little con)

– Less weight (shorter chain and shorter arm rear mech)
– Chain & jockeys slightly further away from c*ap (see above – shorter arm mechs)
– More clearance for tech riding.
– No bent outer rings.
– chain rarely bounces off (again, less chain flapping around)

The con
– ‘lower top speed’ as stated above.

Does it really matter ? Ask yourself how often you find yourself off road [/b]in the big outer ring and either of the 3 smaller sprockets at the back ?
I checked and you essentially ‘lose’ 3 higher ratios (for a 44T outer compared to 32T).

Yes I do occasionally get left a little behind on DH road[/u] sections, but off road, properly (not fire roads) v rarely.

Obvious disclaimer, those are my own findings that suit me using a 32/22 front & 11-32 rear set up, they of course may not suit you or anyone else caring to comment.

If I were you & not sure, do a couple of rides without[/i] using the big ring, then you’ll know for sure 🙂

I’ve never found any significant cons tbh, like steel4real says the few gears you lose are ones I don’t have much use for, but I can use the ground clearance. My bashrings have enough scars on them to tell me that…

ermm think I’d want to go 34 or 36 on middle ring

does a normal mech handle this okay? how’s the jump (as per TandemJeremy)

probably would only bother when chainrings wear out

36 f/mech fine.

No eye deer why Shimano (and Sram to lesser extent) are continuing as triple ring as the main design. I really think 2 rings (and when proven 10 spd) is the future for normal riders.

Pros
No unnecessary gears (for me)
lighter
more chainring clearance over logs, etc

Cons
Reduced range (not an issue for me)

24/36 and 11-34 for me (26″ wheels)

If you do a lot of road riding, it may be an issue for you, otherwise, I found it great – I certainly never spun out.

No need for a bashring unless you already need one.

losing a little top end isn’t actually a con if you only ride off road. You’ll only lose one and a half gears by binning a 42T ring and using a 36T middle and 11-36 is enough for any DH track I’ve ever ridden so you’re only losing pointless gears (top end and cross over)

use 1-6 in granny

really? don’t you find in 22-15/16 the chain’s awfully long/poor derraileur tension?

I use the whole (11-28 8speed) cassette in the 36 but only 1-3 in the granny (22) so only ever use it for steep/long/loose climbs.
22-18/19 pretty much = 36-28

I hate chainslap and find it far noticably worse even with a 30T largest sprocket (and chain as short as poss.)

eye deer

Likewise, I was quite suprised that 2011 XT is 3×10. Does anyone really need 30 gears?

scruff – Member

“No eye deer why Shimano (and Sram to lesser extent) are continuing as triple ring as the main design. I really think 2 rings (and when proven 10 spd) is the future for normal riders.”

Yup. Just that most folks don’t know it yet so still think they need 3×9 (or 3×10). To me 3×9 should be much the same as 1×9 now- some people want it and they can sort it out themselves, but for most people 2×9 should be the default on a proper mountain bike.

Also SRAM and Shimano should get their fingers out and make an XT and a 990 11-36 9-speed block, and stop claiming it as a benefit of 10 speed.

No need for a bashring unless you already need one.

for XC I’d agree, if you’re smacking a 36T ring off stuff bad riding is prob to blame but there is def a need for an outer guide plate to stop the chain falling off the outside over very rough ground.
mine is a BBG superlight 2mm smaller diameter than the chainring so it can’t actually take a hit.

on both my bikes ive now ditched the big ring as i never used it off road, and have fitted a bash ring and kept standard small and “middle” rings. Bash is more for my sake having recently acquired a manky permanent scar on my leg from big ring teeth in an otherwise inocuous off where I got tangled with the bike 😕

GW
“use 1-6 in granny”

really? don’t you find in 22-15/16 the chain’s awfully long/poor derraileur tension?

Nope – as the chain is shortened to suit the 36 ring – plenty of tension. Doing this gets you away from having to change chain rings often,. Its only for climbing anyway.

def a need for an outer guide plate to stop the chain falling off the outside over very rough ground.

Again not for me with the chain shortened and the front mech set correctly I have only lost the chain very occasionally and a turn of the pedals puts it back on again anyway usually.

As someone else with a chainring scar, I ride with a bash now.

schmiken – Member

An in an XC sense:
Pros
Lower Q factor, better chainline,

How does removing the big ring effect Q factor and chainline!?!?!

TJ – As I said, my chain is as short as possible if I removed a link my mech would rip clean off if using big/big..

post a pic of your bike in 22-15?

We ride very differently and from experience losing the chain out of a corner can **** hurt!

Pro – Fashion

Cons – Expense

😉

I hardly ever lost the chain over the top when I was riding without a bash, usually only after really rough stuff that I wasn’t pedalling or otherwise maintaining any sort of tension but that’s exactly the worst time it could happen. Also it won’t pedal back on due to the lack of ramps and pins. So, bashring, no big thing to use one and it’s sometimes better than not IMO.

(I did have a superlight like GW but mine was bigger than the chainring, tagged it gently off a rock at kielder while riding with the forks shortened and bent it like a pringle )

I think triples are hangovers from road bikes.

The sort of riding mtb’s are now built for in the UK realy does not need a triple.

Lots of my mates are going 2×9, 1×9 or x10 now.

i sliced my leg open really badly when using a triple on a pitch. Never again. All the other con’s are insignificant compared to riding with a big spinning razor blade between your legs

gw – I only use the granny ring when climbing. So I would not be powering out of corners.

I just checked – it has plenty of tension. I have never had the chain ride off in granny 6 – the chainline is such that it is really unlikely as the cahin would tend to go off the side of the granny towards the big ring.

This is in granny / 6th

[/url] new year [/img]

11-34 cassette and 22/36/bash. Used the same front mech no problem and don’t really notice the gap. I use bottom/top 5 gears on each ring so change less. Very occasional issue on big ring/little ring choice but have never missed the top couple of gears. Pretty much all good for me and lots of gouges in the bashring to show it is worthwhile

This is getting confusing because there are two things meant by twin ring. One is just dropping the outer ring for a bash guard. The other is using a dedicated double chainset which tries to have near the top and bottom end gears of a triple.

I have dropped the outer for a bash for a while, but gone back to a triple.. The main reason was that it gave me more clearance and the bash guard came in useful for attempting to get over things I couldn’t lift/jump the bike over. It was good if you were just plodding around but I only ran a 32 middle. I don’t like having big jumps in gears and I like being able to climb in the middle ring.

I’m thinking of going down to a dedicated double and bash next time everything needs changing, because of the stated benefits and i can’t remember the last time I used my large chain ring.

As an aside, also dropping down to a 170 crank length, is it a simple case of added clearance v higher centre of gravity, or does it alter the pedaling much? I’ve just put on some thinner superstar pedals which have made a difference for both.

Scamper – Member

“As an aside, also dropping down to a 170 crank length, is it a simple case of added clearance v higher centre of gravity, or does it alter the pedaling much?”

Well, put it this way one of my XTR cranks is 170 and one is 175, I have no idea which is which. I think the 170 is on the Hemlock but it could be the other way round. I guess there’s even a decent chance the arms have got mixed up. I’m sure some people can tell the difference or think they can, but I sure can’t.

schmiken – Member

An in an XC sense:
Pros
Lower Q factor, better chainline,

How does removing the big ring effect Q factor and chainline!?!?!

If you go for a dedicated 2x crank they tend to have narrower q factors and better chainline as they’re not pushed out further to deal with a big ring.
If you’re just taking off your big ring then there are no Q factor or chainline benefits!

Scamper – Member

“As an aside, also dropping down to a 170 crank length, is it a simple case of added clearance v higher centre of gravity, or does it alter the pedaling much?”
Yes it alters pedalling.
All my DH bikes have 165s all my hardtails 170s and all my BMX 175s. I notice instantly sama as I notice which ones have rapid fire which have sram and which have none. and yes it does alter pedalling characteristics, the shorter cranks are quicker to spin up to speed on.

Northwind – Member
Well, put it this way one of my XTR cranks is 170 and one is 175, I have no idea which is which. I think the 170 is on the Hemlock but it could be the other way round. I guess there’s even a decent chance the arms have got mixed up. I’m sure some people can tell the difference or think they can, but I sure can’t.

You bought a Hemlock – nuff said 😛
would you not notice a slightly bent crank arm or pedal axle while riding either?

TJ – sorry, didn’t imagine you’d still use long cage mechs? you’re missing out on the other benefit of more mech/rock clearance there **** luddite 😛

oh.. and BTW

the chainline is such that it is really unlikely as the cahin would tend to go off the side of the granny towards the big ring.

unless you have moved the chainline out further, when you’re whooring down a rocky trail with in the 36T ring and in 5th gear or higher and your chain is long enough to go round 36/34 that is exactly when it will bounce up and fall off the outside of your non-guideplate/bashguard covered chainring..
believe me, I have experimented with many many set-ups until I was happy in this respect

Run 38/28 up front, 11-32 out back (9 speed)

That sits me more or less right in between the traditional big/middle and middle/granny.

Took a little getting used to, but I spent most of my time in the middle anyway on the triple when offroad, so a little extra clearance, and removal of the “excess” gears and weight was not a drama.

Use the 38 for road and fireroad stuff and don’t lose much at all (I usually ride to my “local” trails, so need higher than standard middle ring) and the few spots where the 28×32 is not low enough, I used to end up hike-a-biking anyway with the traditional granny, so not really much difference, in that regard.

Next bike will have 10 out back and I will alter to 2 upfront if it doesn’t already have that. I find I have no need for the 3x from experience and surely even less so with the greater ranger of 10 speed rear blocks. If I was fitter, stronger and technically better and lived closer to the trails too, I’d probably ditch the 2x for 1x…

Cons
Smaller range, more expensive, less replacement chainrings.

Pro – Fashion

Cons – Expense

I don’t get this. My last bash ring was cheaper than a good quality 44t and there is no general shortage of replacement chainrings??

GW – Member
“would you not notice a slightly bent crank arm or pedal axle while riding either?”

Absolutely no idea tbh. I notice differences in pedal or shoe thickness, but not crank length. I’ll need to get the hammer out and bend a pedal to check this out… I’m not even sure how long the SLX ones on the rigid are, but I bet I could ride all 3 bikes back to back and be none the wiser.

Slightly different setup here – 11-34 9 speed on the back and either 27-40 or 29-42 on the front depending on which bike I am using.

Only a slight lose of range and don’t miss the real granny gears anyway.

Really like the 27-40 for XC.

Have tried the follwing combo’s on my Enduro, 22/36, 22/34, 24/34 and 24/36. I now run the 24/36 x 11/32, this seems to offer the best speed, climbability and shifting performance for me.
You can notice the difference with the different setups so I would experiment if possible. I also run a 36t max bash which helps with clearance.
Any real benefits for a 3 ring setup, probably not other than when the outer has worn you can use it as a bash ring :D.

Ride mostly in the Lakes so need granny gear up front for getting up the hills although can do most stuff on middle ring. Currently 22/34 up front or 22/36.

11-36 9 speed cassette…..now that’s the way forward. Get’s rid of buying lots of new stuff. But I don’t imagine SRAM or Shimano setting aside the campaign to persuade us all that 10 speed is the only way forward.

Is there a gap for someone independent to step in here and sweep up?

I now run the 24/36 x 11/32

I reckon this would be almost the ideal gearing for me if I was to go 2×9 on my Anthem. I’m not sure that 36/11 is a high enough gear for the odd firetrack descent though (I do a bit of XC racing, and although I know I could spin faster on these sections, it is quite nice to just gently turn the pedals in a big gear sometimes).

I’m wondering if it might be possible to swap the 11t sprocket on an XT 11-32 for a 10t sprocket to give a slightly larger top gear. Anyone tried that?

The alternative would be 38t chainring, but that sounds like a big jump for the front mech to smoothly cope with, and clearance would probably become a bit tight if I upped the inner ring to 26t.

2×9 is sounding more appealing than 2×10 since I would just be replacing bits when they wear out anyway.

I think Hope are including an 11-36 in the cassette-o-freehub thing. And seen conflicting info but some mags say there’s to be a 9-34 as well. Expensive though.

There is a way… Shimano make a 12-36 deore block, designed for 29ers. And you can take that and then monkey around with the rings. But it’s very heavy and you’ll basically need 2 cassettes to do it (or buy individual rings seperately, but that’s usually quite pricy)

I’ve read of cnc’d 36T 9-speed sprockets, designed to be fitted on a freehub before you fit a standard cassette. You would have to loose the 11T though to fit it on, so only 12-36 or 13-36 (9-speed), depending on whether you use an 11-32 or 11-34 cassette (probably best with 11-34, due to smaller jump to 36T).

Prototype 9 – 36 tooth Cassette Gearing

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/9-36-cassette-prototype-2011.html

I don’t like double – I like spending most of my time in the middle ring rather than shifting between a 24 and 36.

Big ring is handy on the road too.

Big ring looses a few teeth but so what – still works fine and lighter (I don’t care abou that though). I’ve not impaled myself on it in 20+years of hardcore riding.

In summary: double & bash = needs to look current/hardcore/customised.