• This topic has 26 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 13 years ago by mboy.
Viewing 27 posts - 1 through 27 (of 27 total)
  • whats wrong with 3×9 anyway
  • richieokeefe1
    Free Member

    been running 1×9 for a while good idea in theory but if I go to wales peaks etc I need my granny ring and when i’m on a club ride the 44t chainring is good for road sections so there you have it i’m back to 27 speed and happy with it 🙂 when it all wears out I might then go for 2×10 my bike may not be fashionable but it works ! 🙂

    Riding a bike that’s not fashionable ?
    You really don’t get mountain biking, do you ?

    avalanche
    Free Member

    whats wrong with 3×9 anyway?
    Nothing.

    crocodilian
    Free Member

    I’m looking forward to 11 speed cassettes. Well, it’s one better isn’t it.

    richieokeefe1
    Free Member

    I was just thinking out loud

    james
    Free Member

    “I’m looking forward to 11 speed cassettes”
    how about this? (dated june 2008)

    brooess
    Free Member

    Cycling industry needs innovation to survive. If your current stuff works ok for you I say keep it.
    If you’ve the cash and you think the new stuff will be better for you, buy it. But I don’t think we should assume new stuff is necessarily better…

    buzz-lightyear
    Free Member

    3×9 is fine. But I do very little road riding and local hills are mostly doable with 1×9. So what is the point of a front mech, cable, shifter and 2 unused chainrings?

    singlespeedstu
    Full Member

    crocodilian – Member

    I’m looking forward to 11 speed cassettes. Well, it’s one better isn’t it.

    [video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbVKWCpNFhY[/video] 😆

    bassspine
    Free Member

    3×9 – don’t you need a beard to ride that niche?

    Taff
    Free Member

    I ride around Hampshire… We don’t have hills worthy of a granny ring.

    rudedog
    Free Member

    Bike manufacturers are always coming up with products you didn’t know you needed.

    Blazin-saddles
    Free Member

    Nothing at all… But, I found the chainline on 3×9 terrible if I was on the big ring and anyway north of half way up the cassette. I never use the grannyring. Tried 2×9 and always found myself on the wrong chainring, big too big for climbs small too small for anywhere else than steep climbs. I now run a single 38 on a 11-36 cassette, perfect for where I live, I can get up anything I want to and fast enough for 30mph on the road if I need.

    7hz
    Free Member

    Yeh I’m enjoying 1×9 as well – 32 chainring, 11-32 cassette. Not missing the big ring at all, used it once a month for a 3 minute road blast, not worth carrying it about for that, 32/11 is fast enough for a MTB. Not missing the granny ring either, use it very rarely and TBH it’s easier just to get out the saddle and mash, or get off the bike and walk, than it is to winch up some crazy gradient. Hated the noise from the front dérailleur. Saved 450 grams not having it + chaingrings + shifter + cable.

    Elfinsafety
    Free Member

    I ride around Hampshire… We don’t have hills worthy of a granny ring.

    This is true. There’s nowt really that can defeat a single speed in Hampshire, tbh.

    Mind you, I din’t even use my granny ring in North Wales, and they’ve got some biggish hills there.

    When I started MTBing, the smallest front rings were 28t, and the largest rear, 28t too. 1:1 ratio. And I coped. So, when did a 32/32 or 32/34t combo become inadequate?

    Granny rings are aptly named…

    buzz-lightyear
    Free Member

    To be fair, the granny ring on my FS gets a lot of use because the bike is heavier and slacker and climbs much better sat down than stood up.

    thepodge
    Free Member

    I’m going 1×8 as soon as I can afford an Alfine

    billyboy
    Free Member

    I usualy have a beard

    starsh78
    Free Member

    I’m running 2×9 and a bash guard now, changed my ratios from 22t inner 32t middle, to 28,38 rear cassette remains a 11-34

    its a nice compromise

    specializedneeds
    Full Member

    whats wrong with 3×9 anyway

    Ground clearance.
    That’s the only reason I’m 2×9. Fed up getting left behind on the 500m of road on the way home though!

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    3 x 9 all the way, I’ve gotten soft since 24-28 was the lowest available (about 20 years ago).

    daznal
    Free Member

    you bikers with your fancy gears,im sticking with my trusty penny farthing and i’ve never had a pedal strike

    cynic-al
    Free Member

    I ride single speed as well.

    Dancake
    Free Member

    I like doubles. On my FS, with a short chain and short mech it is all nicely neat and tucked in. (clearance front and back) (32/22) and is all ratios Ill ever need round here. 3 rings wouldnt work as well on this one IMO

    I needed rings for my hack bike, so I run 39/26 with a longer mech which is fine for the road to work and works fine for the occasional off road it does. (it was cheaper to buy 2 rings than 3! I dont want for more gears on the road and I can still go up. Couldnt care less how many rings I run on this one 🙂

    mikewsmith
    Free Member

    the main reason for me is that I kept on smashing teeth off 42t rings or gouging my legs. Now I have 36/22 and a bash ring 🙂

    3×10 now there is something pointless

    ampthill
    Full Member

    I’m about to ride from my home in Bedfordshire

    I’m horribley unfit and heavy by forum standards so I love having a granny ring

    But I’m certain the climbs on my ride today are as steep as any where else in the country

    mboy
    Free Member

    3×10 now there is something pointless

    Have you tried it?

    I can tell you it gives you all the benefits of 3×9, only with closer spaced gear ratios both front and back. It really is pretty good!

Viewing 27 posts - 1 through 27 (of 27 total)

The topic ‘whats wrong with 3×9 anyway’ is closed to new replies.