Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 43 total)
  • What's the point of 2x….?
  • chevychase
    Full Member

    If you want a higher top end 1x doesn’t cut the mustard. So a front derailleur becomes necessary.

    I’m now struggling to think of a reason why you go 2×11 rather than 3x… If you’ve got the faff of a front derailleur anyway why would you limit your gear range at all? Just go big and have 3x and all the advantages it brings.

    Am I missing something other than perhaps a mild aesthetic value?

    mikewsmith
    Free Member

    Big range double 26/39 or similar gives you heaps of gears without the even greater overlap of 3x, you can run a bash and or chain guide with 2x.
    Really what’s the point of 3x on a mountain bike? Ever roadies seem to have given up on them.

    davidtaylforth
    Free Member

    Ground clearance
    Fashion
    Three multiplied by the number at the rear (10/11) is hard on the brain and too much to think about when your heart is pounding and you feel like an asthmatic.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    chestrockwell
    Full Member

    Some people like more gears and a broader range, some like less with the relative simplicity that brings. That’s it, end of chat.

    carlosg
    Free Member

    My last MTB came with 2x, within a week I’d put my old 3x chain set on it and bought new mechs. I just like having the range without having a dinner plate sized sprocket at the back wheel , never been one for fashion and very rarely strike the big ring on logs or rocks.

    BillOddie
    Full Member

    I used to really like 2+Bash set ups. 22+32 chain rings with a “normal” cassette seemed to be spot on, 32 was fine most riding but the 22 inner was a nice bailout.

    That being said now I’m on a 1×10 with a wide range cassette and 30T ring I’m not sure I’d go back…

    n0b0dy0ftheg0at
    Free Member

    Maybe the way forward is to have a single sprocket and 3+ chainrings. 😆

    fudge9202
    Free Member

    I’ve run with 1×10 on my last 4 bikes and didn’t find the range in any way restricting. I’ve recently just changed all the drivetrain on my new Cannondale Habit from 2×10 to 1×10. I like the simplicity.
    I suppose it is dictated by where you ride, in Rostrevor (Mourne Mountains) there are serious climbs but I find the 1×10 copes very well

    hols2
    Free Member

    I run 26-36 chainrings and bashguard with an 11-34 cassette on a 26″ bike. Gives better clearance over logs and stuff but still have a bailout gear and enough top speed for the road. I’ve never missed the big ring, need the little one though.

    trail_rat
    Free Member

    Really what’s the point of 3x on a mountain bike? Ever roadies seem to have given up on them.

    Touring . Both MTB and on the road.

    jimw
    Free Member

    I still use 3×9 on two of my bikes. Mostly because they are older (2001 and 2005) and I have collected plenty of spares for them over the years. I have enough spare chainrings and cassettes to last me another 10 years at the current rate of wear.
    2×10 on the others. Same scenario, I bought a few spares cheap when people were getting rid of new chainrings when the 1x fad started and so can’t see the point of spending lots on something I don’t really need. And the gearing suits me.

    mikewsmith
    Free Member

    Touring . Both MTB and on the road.

    And there is its niche, happy to leave it there.

    mattsccm
    Free Member

    Fashion. A triple provides better gearing. No big gaps or silly chain lines. The front mech is the simplest, most robust moving part on a bike and removes the need for a huge rear sprocket and great dangly mech that costs a bomb.
    However what is new sells as MTB ers are very fashion concious and mob focused. Something else will happen in a few years.

    cdoc
    Free Member

    I run 26-36 chainrings and bashguard with an 11-34 cassette on a 26″ bike.

    Exactly this, same setup, covers pretty much everything with all the ground clearance that I could want.

    Goldigger
    Free Member

    I run 3×12…

    MrOvershoot
    Full Member

    mattsccm – Member

    Fashion. A triple provides better gearing. No big gaps or silly chain lines. The front mech is the simplest, most robust moving part on a bike and removes the need for a huge rear sprocket and great dangly mech that costs a bomb.
    However what is new sells as MTB ers are very fashion concious and mob focused. Something else will happen in a few years.

    ^^This very much^^

    I’m not immune from the various cycling fads Fat Bike, SS, 29″er, Gravel bike, City bike etc but on or off road my go to bikes have 3x front.

    n0b0dy0ftheg0at
    Free Member

    Maybe the way forward is to have a single sprocket and 5+ chainrings. 😆

    mb51
    Free Member

    Hi. I’ve one of each. An old Saracen blitz i converted to 3x9speed. It’s got shimano’s highest mtb gearing. a On One 456evo11, with shimano XT 2X10, 28-40t and a 11-36cassette and a On One Codeine 650b with XT 1×11, 36t and 11-46cassette.The blitz 3×9 is a beast , largest chainring is extremely high,but useable, middle is good and small is plenty low enough, done QECP on it , it made it around. The 456evo in my opinion is really suited to 2×10 ,28-40t and 11-36cassette with a very good topspeed, the half gears keep it on the boil, with minimal energy loss, and the inner ring and 11-36 Cassette mean i usually have a good choice of low gears for the climbs i do. My Codeine 650b with 1×11 36t and 11-46 Cassette needed a aftermarket chainring to get a okay topspeed, low gear is good. My take on the 1x,2x and 3x is the 3×9 is good ,but can’t help thinking bad trail conditions could cause it problems. The 2×10 in the 28-40t, 11-36 variant on the 456 is the sweet spot on the trails i ride. But i personally find the 1×11 36t,11-46cass let the Codeine 650b down , due to a lack of flow, and having too low or too high low gears on climbs, while i can handle the 1x gearing, i just think it’s over rated on certain terrain, conditions and trails. All in all , personally i feel of the 3 the 2x is the best when used with well thought out gear ratios.the 1x for me lacks flow and too high or too low climbing gears, it’s usable but a pain in the a**e. 2x suits me best.

    cookeaa
    Full Member

    Having foolishly gone and bitten myself on such threads lately can I just propose we stop feeding the chainring trolls…

    Who really gives that much of a shit about chainrings?

    tjagain
    Full Member

    ground clearance and not having a big spiky thing to bite your leg

    22/36 chainrings with a bash ring on the only bike I have left with dérailleurs

    flashinthepan
    Free Member

    cookeaa – Member

    Who really gives that much of a shit about chainrings?

    This ^^^^^

    They’re just gears. Just run whatever gets you ‘oop hill and down dale’

    chevychase
    Full Member

    So 3x for bikepacking then? Seems to be the consensus.

    Everything else on preference.

    I’m going to be getting me a bikepacking rig and my 1×11 enduro monster just doesn’t have the high range. Probably not enough low for really steep climbs fully laden either.

    mikewsmith
    Free Member

    They’re just gears. Just run whatever gets you ‘oop hill and down dale’

    Absolutely, just don’t dismiss something you don’t understand/get and take a quick look at the maths to see what your actually getting from your gears in comparison to others.

    goldenwonder
    Free Member

    I love the range the 2×11 gives me on my new xc bike, but I’ll still end up swapping it to a 1x for weight saving & looks more than anything else.
    Performance wise, the 2x is still superior IMO for so many types of riding.

    whitestone
    Free Member

    Use whatever’s right for your riding. Both my off-road bikes are 1x, both my road bikes are 2x.

    Most of the time you should be riding in the middle of whatever range you have. If you aren’t then you need to sort things out.

    honourablegeorge
    Full Member

    chevychase – Member

    Am I missing something other than perhaps a mild aesthetic value?

    Overlap between the rings. 2x, you have 2 versions of a lot of your gears. 3 x, you have three of some gears.

    scuttler
    Full Member

    2x means I have more gears than most of my mates and everyone knows the bike with the most gears must be the best.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    The one that seems odd to me is 3×11, really not sure what benefit that’s supposed to have over 3×10. Every other configuration has its own significant advantages and disadvantages.

    mattsccm – Member

    Fashion. A triple provides better gearing. No big gaps or silly chain lines. The front mech is the simplest, most robust moving part on a bike and removes the need for a huge rear sprocket and great dangly mech that costs a bomb.

    Same old myths.

    Big gaps- here’s a 9-speed 11-34, a 10-speed 11-36 and an 11 speed 11-42, typical mtb casettes for the best part of a decade. The gappiest is the 9-speed.

    11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30-34
    11-13-15-17-19-21-24-28-32-36
    11-13-15-17-19-21-24-28-32-37-42

    Chain lines- the chainlines of all single, double and triple systems are well within the drivetrain’s capacity so it’s a non-issue.

    Huge expensive rear mech- a medium XT is the same size and price regardless of how many rings you have. It used to be, you used a longer mech for triple than you do for single, but I think that’s changed now and everything uses mediums?

    Basically the only way ratios and mech size becomes a factor is if you’re using narrow cassettes and short mechs- which is fair enough, but you know it’s an oddity.

    brassneck
    Full Member

    I’ve always found 3 ring front mechs go out of true and require more regular adjustment, whilst 2 rings don’t, but still give me a usable top gear for road bits than 1x which is a little lacking.

    All a bit 1st word problem, but 2x is my preferred compromise.

    D0NK
    Full Member

    2×9 drivechain on my 29er is shagged so going to replace soon with….
    2×10 I think. I may have gone 1×11 if I had a wad of cash hanging around, maybe 34*10-42, but I don’t, so 24/36*11-36. I’ve just got 1×11 on my “bestest” bike but so far I’m unconvinced about the longevity of it for high mileage use, we’ll see how it goes. Can’t see me ever going for a triple again tho, I binned my big ring a while back, for clearance and the fact I barely used it. Unless you’re doing a lot of road miles* then triples give more range than you I** ever need.

    I’d probably stick with 2×9 if 9spd wasn’t more expensive than 10spd

    *So I guess touring bikes are going to use them for a while yet.
    **which is all that matters really

    D0NK
    Full Member

    The gappiest is the 9-speed.

    I never liked 11-34 9 spd, had one cassette, made sure I didn’t make that mistake again. I think on some they fiddled with some of the smaller cogs by 1T but other wise 10 and 11 just added cogs to the 9spd 11-32 cassette.

    nickfrog
    Free Member

    mattsccm – Member
    Fashion. A triple provides better gearing. No big gaps or silly chain lines. The front mech is the simplest, most robust moving part on a bike and removes the need for a huge rear sprocket and great dangly mech that costs a bomb.
    However what is new sells as MTB ers are very fashion concious and mob focused. Something else will happen in a few years.

    ^^This very much^^

    I’m not immune from the various cycling fads Fat Bike, SS, 29″er, Gravel bike, City bike etc but on or off road my go to bikes have 3x front.

    Let me understand this. Because cycling is indeed open to innovation and change and that sometimes this translate into stuff that is not needed nor helps, should I not adopt something that I have really liked for 7 years (x1 ring) and makes a big difference to my riding so that I am not accused of being a fashion victim or a sheep ?

    The binary thinking is obvious on that one.

    1x is clearly not for everyone but it really isn’t a fad.

    For me the front mech is crude and medieval but I have no issues with anyone using one. I expect the same level of tolerance.

    D0NK
    Full Member

    should I not adopt something ..//.. so that I am not accused of being a fashion victim or a sheep ?

    weeeell, not you but: the new enormo-cassettes we’re seeing, where have they come from? Is it possible that some people saw 1x and said “yes I want that” and 2 weeks later realise that they aint got the legs for it and need somet easier gears. In my less charitable moments I may consider that a little ovine in nature.

    BTW do the gappy 46/48/50 cassettes end up negating the weight saving of dropping the front mech? I think we may be close to form/fashion over ruling function there. Or is getting rid of the front mech really worth these downsides?
    <edit> sunrace 11-50 526g apparently, xt 9spd cassette 263g, 155g for the mech, 140g for the shifter, you’ll need an inner ring too so no, big 1x is still lighter. Gappy gears tho.

    FunkyDunc
    Free Member

    Some people like more gears and a broader range, some like less with the relative simplicity that brings. That’s it, end of chat.

    and some are followers of fashion

    I still remember 3×7 setups with 12-28 cassettes. Boasting about 21 gears to astonished onlookers.

    breatheeasy
    Free Member

    Big gaps- here’s a 9-speed 11-34, a 10-speed 11-36 and an 11 speed 11-42, typical mtb casettes for the best part of a decade. The gappiest is the 9-speed.

    11-13-15-17-20-23-26-30-34
    11-13-15-17-19-21-24-28-32-36
    11-13-15-17-19-21-24-28-32-37-42

    Funnily enough 9 speed is obviously the ‘gappiest’ as it has less jumps to get from 11 to 34. But stick a double or triple on the front and you can get around any of the gaps with judicious usage of the front chainrings. Or use an example with a 9 speed 11-21 cassette and a double chainset maybe?

    Sundayjumper
    Full Member

    Maybe the way forward is to have a single sprocket and 5+ chainrings.

    I suspect that a hipster somewhere has already done this, to add range to his “fixie”.

    Calling a single speed a fixie is another thing that annoys me.

    whitestone
    Free Member

    The dinner plate sized cogs are obviously an attempt to provide the total range of a 2x or 3x setup but do you actually need that range? While a 1x drivetrain won’t cover the entire range you can optimise it for a particular use. In practice I’ve found that you’ll only need to try one or two sizes of front ring before settling on one that works for you.

    1x is only expensive if you just look at a system like SRAM Eagle but that’s a bit like saying 2x/3x systems are expensive and quoting Di2 prices. Something like a Sunrace cassette is a little pricier than an XT but then you don’t need the front shifter and mech.

    D0NK
    Full Member

    Or use an example with a 9 speed 11-21 cassette and a double chainset maybe?

    Ages ago in an ill thought out weightweenie phase I tried a triple with a road cassette, waaaaay too much shifting, front and rear.

    you can get around any of the gaps with judicious usage of the front chainrings

    Hmm I think even frontmech fans admit that front shifts are unwieldy. With a 2x I like an “up” range from the inner ring and a “along/down” from the outer with a little crossover for the transitions. Lots of front shifting, as my above example, isn’t a fun way to do things.
    All imo, ymmv etc

    Northwind
    Full Member

    breatheeasy – Member

    Or use an example with a 9 speed 11-21 cassette and a double chainset maybe?

    Yeah, I thought it best to stick to examples that people actually use tbh.

    D0NK – Member

    BTW do the gappy 46/48/50 cassettes end up negating the weight saving of dropping the front mech?

    The only 50T cassette is Eagle so let’s look at that

    10-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36-42-50
    11-13-15-17-19-21-23-26-30-34

    Again not especially gappy (remember the gaps are proportional, 42 to 50 looks big on paper but in practice it’s almost identical to 11 to 13) Not everyone likes this sort of setup of course but it’s been the mtb default for some time.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 43 total)

The topic ‘What's the point of 2x….?’ is closed to new replies.