Why is 2x10 considered an improvment on 3x9?

Bike Forum

Why is 2x10 considered an improvment on 3x9?

46 posts & 26 voices | Started 3 months ago by rollindoughnut | Latest reply from njee20

Tags:

No tags yet.

Pages: 12 Next »

rollindoughnut - Member

Why are 2 x 10 setups considered an improvement on 3 x 9?

I want to shift up and down the full range of my 9 sprocket cassette with the speed and assurance only the rear derailler can provide. That covers 95% of my riding. Occasionally I need to shift to the granny ring for technical or extreme climbs or to the big ring if I'm on the road or need to stand up and blast on flat off road.
What's the logic of essentially splitting my gears in two, forcing me to do a chainring shift to access either end of my previously easily accesible ratios?

Are we sure the marketing men aren't driving this one?

Posted 3 months ago #
gaberin - Member

Would be interesting to know..

Posted 3 months ago #
13thfloormonk - Member

Meh, the marketing men are driving everything, once they've run out of ways to improve 9spd they just lop a chainring off and start all over, its why we've got electric shifting, office chair technology on our seat posts, extendable handlebars etc etc etc

Just ignore it, whats important (to me) is that my new bike came with 2x10 and quite frankly, I didn't notice a difference, in fact, I think it might be a slight improvement. The two rings up front overlap in such a way that you're not constantly shifting all the time, its basically wee ring for the uphills, big ring for the flat and the downhills, you can practically use the whole cassette from both rings as the chainline is better.

Posted 3 months ago #
doug_basqueMTB.com - Member

36 teeth cassettes? For me that's the big benifit.

Posted 3 months ago #
irc - Member

my new bike came with 2x10 and quite frankly, I didn't notice a difference,

I've run a mixture of 3x8 and 3x9 bikes over the past few years. I find the rear indexing on 8 speed both easier to set up and less likely to go out of adjustment than 9 speed.

Just out of curiosity as I'm not in the market for a new bike right now is 10 speed harder to set up and keep indexed than 9 speed?

Posted 3 months ago #
clubber - Member

For me at least

- All the gear range I actually use on my mtb
- more chainring clearance

I won't be going back to triples unless it's for an mtb I do a lot of road miles on which is unlikely as I have road and cx bikes for that...

Posted 3 months ago #
doug_basqueMTB.com - Member

irc. I don't think so. I honestly haven't touched the adjusters on my Shimano XT shifters in a year. I wrote a few words on the XT stuff and how it lasted, it's on my website, under "gear reviews", if you want. The basic conclusion for me was shimano xt 10 speed has been good to me. The SRAM X9 was a disaster for me.

Posted 3 months ago #
Simon - Member

36 teeth cassettes? For me that's the big benifit

Why no 9spd 36t cassettes though? (other than heavyweight Deore)

Posted 3 months ago #
b r - Member

I demo'ed a Remedy with 2x10.

Very impressed by both the quality (and it wasn't just because it was X0, as my bike runs XTR) of front shifting and the ability to use any of the rear gears with either of the front.

No way would I throw away my 3x9 for 2x10, but if I was buying a new bike I'd look for it.

Also you probably need a bit of fitness as the lowest gear in 2x10 (with a 36 rear) is not as low as 3x9 (with a 34 rear).

Posted 3 months ago #
flap_jack - Member

It seems no one wants to go fast off road anymore. I still running 46 on the front...

Posted 3 months ago #
rollindoughnut - Member

A lot of replies about shifters and indexing, but all things inc fitness being the same surely having to shift chainrings halfway through the gear progression is a hinderance?

Posted 3 months ago #
clubber - Member

so you spin out 46x11? Really?....

Posted 3 months ago #
mrmo - Member

I find the rear indexing on 8 speed both easier to set up and less likely to go out of adjustment than 9 speed.

Just out of curiosity as I'm not in the market for a new bike right now is 10 speed harder to set up and keep indexed than 9 speed?

Never had a problem setting up 6, 7, 8 or 9spd gears. oh well.

As for why go 2x9/10 front shifts are what tend to break chains, front shifts are never as clean as rear shifts, on the basis that you shouldn't be using the cross over gears anyway you aren't losing that many gears in the middle, there is the detail that with three rings there is a lot of duplication going on. with a 2 ring setup you lose a couple of gears, if you don't use the very extremes why not.

Having thought about it i could probably go 1x10 quite happily if i didn't have to get off road by riding on the road and if hope ever release there 9 tooth sprocket i suspect most of my concerns would go away.

Posted 3 months ago #
james - Member

"36 teeth cassettes? For me that's the big benifit"
But you can get 36t 9spd casettes?
I believe they were originally released for 29"ers to replicate a 32T casette on a 26"er

IIRC Shimano triple ring 10spd chainsets use a 24T granny ring, 9spd use 22T. A 22-34 combo is a lower gear than 24-36T
SRAM and others use a 22T granny on 10spd cranks, but again, there are 36toothed 9spd casettes

There is/was a 20T granny ring for some middleburn chainsets if you want even lower?

Posted 3 months ago #
clubber - Member

as above, you use big for most stuff and small for steep or long climbs. ime I actually shift less at the front now.

Posted 3 months ago #
Jehosophat - Member

I run a 46 chainring and use it - a lot - mostly on road but off road as well. I'm not lucky enough to be able to avoid a fair few road miles to get to the best stuff. And on holidays to real mountains, high gearing is very handy - on and off road.

I'm sticking with 3x9 (indeed 3x8 on the bikes used in mud a lot) - and rapid rise XTR mechs - which, unavailable in 10sp, will keep me in 8/9 speed for some time yet as I hate normal rear mechs!

Posted 3 months ago #
Garry_Lager - Member

Don't think it makes any performance difference really, unless you're a particular gear ratio fetishist. Lower entropy though, innit, so that's good.
There'd be no way I'd switch an existing set up over, but I have 2x10 on a new bike and am happy with it.
As a few people mentioned on the other thread, 1 x n is a bigger switch and can be a noticeable improvement depending on your type of riding.

Posted 3 months ago #
mrmo - Member

It seems no one wants to go fast off road anymore. I still running 46 on the front...

46x11, that is some gear, at around 100rpm, which is quick but not anywhere near stupid your getting on for 40mph. a 40x11 will get you comfortably over 30mph. How often do you need a gear that big?

Posted 3 months ago #
13thfloormonk - Member

fitness being the same surely having to shift chainrings halfway through the gear progression is a hinderance?

Well... not really, see what I wrote above. Small ring for the climbs, maybe start shifting down the cassette as you pick up speed or the terrain levels out, then stick it in the big ring till you hit another significant climb. In a way, you having to shift from the little ring, to the middle ring, to the big ring, would be more of a hindrance, if you actually consider shifting a gear a hindrance that is (maybe in the middle of a bunch sprint, yes...)

Flap Jack, I don't know where I would spin out a 46x11 gear, so few of my rides feature long fast descents. Singletrack, technical/steep descents, masses of mud and bogs perhaps, but nowhere I'd need a 46, in fact, before I got a 2x10 bike I'd pre-empted 'Dyna-Sys' and gone down to a 42 tooth chainring anyway.

Posted 3 months ago #
mrmo - Member

maybe my attitude is coloured by the detail that when i started out granny was 24x28, and that didn't seem to be a problem for anyone.

Posted 3 months ago #
tomhoward - Member

Guess ive bucked the trend, I've just ditched 1x9 in favour of 3x9. Curse my pathetic legs and lungs! And general fitness...:-S

Posted 3 months ago #
kevolution - Member

I guess it was aimed at xc racers initially to narrow the q factor more like road bikes and then pave the way for bigger wheels just like road bikes.
The next big thing in mtb is drop bars.

Posted 3 months ago #
tomhoward - Member

Shhh, don't tell the cool kids who already run drops, it'll take away 1 of their precious niches....

Posted 3 months ago #
flap_jack - Member

Flap Jack, I don't know where I would spin out a 46x11 gear,

Into Les Linderets, you can hit over 75 kmph on the PassPortes heh heh. Just watch out for the large drainage channel...

Posted 3 months ago #
smuttiesmith - Member

flap_jack - Member
Flap Jack, I don't know where I would spin out a 46x11 gear,
Into Les Linderets, you can hit over 75 kmph on the PassPortes heh heh. Just watch out for the large drainage channel...

But why would you take the wide fire road when you can take the kick ass descent off to the left with its steep vertigo inducing switchbacks??

Posted 3 months ago #
bent_udder - Member

I'll tell you why for one reason - buying a Deore touring chainset (26, 36, 48) and selling the big ring is actually cheaper than buying three new chainrings for my XT chainset, and comes in lighter to boot, with nice long lasting steel rings. The Deore cranks went on my singlespeed and the chainrings onto the XT cranks on my Five. With a 11-34t 9 speed rear, it has a reasonable range as well - good enough, as they say. I rarely need the granny. When and if my rear mech or shifter conks out, I'll think about 2x10. but that might take a while.

As Mrmo said, it used to be 24x28, and that worked fine.

Posted 3 months ago #
kayak23 - Member

You can run a bashring and avoid laceration.

Posted 3 months ago #
bm0p700f - Member

If I was building a new mountan bike I would build a 2x9 not a 2x10 as it cheaper and off all the same benefits. As ride single speeds which are even cheaper so I won't be building a 2x9 anythime soon. Unless I find a stash of cash then I will build a 29'er with a 2x10 set up.

Posted 3 months ago #
float - Member

forcing me to do a chainring shift to access either end of my previously easily accesible ratios?

nail > head. this is why im sticking 3x9.

the way i see it, granny ring - uphills, middle - flat, big - downhill, i then use the cassette to trim the gearing. with 2 up front if you run out of gears on the little cog, you shift up on the front but then have to shift the chain right the way across the cassette to get the gear you want (does that make sense, its late...)

also if anyone can point me in the direction of a ramped 40 tooth cog for the front i would be very grateful.

Posted 3 months ago #
mrmo - Member

also if anyone can point me in the direction of a ramped 40 tooth cog for the front i would be very grateful.

My TA 40 tooth ring has ramps on it.

Posted 3 months ago #
amedias - Member

I'm still running a 26/36/46 XTR M952 front setup and can honestly say I barely even use the middle ring, let alone he granny.

I don't often spin it out, but I prefer to push a bigger gear (probably a result of SSing a lot) on the climbs, for most of the riding I do locally and the trails at Afan/Cwmcarn it's big ring all the way.

I know I shouldn't be that far up the cassette in the big ring cos of the chain angle etc, but I prefer the feel in the big ring, and my bike has horrible feedback in anything smaller than 36tooth, and I'm still only on the 2nd set of chainrings on that crank and the cassette is nearly 2 years old so wear hasn't been an issue.

Every 2x something setup I have tried has felt really under geared in the outer ring, and the rare times I do go for the granny it's cos it's mental steep or I'm knackered so I like having a proper granny instead of a 'slightly small middle ring', so for me 2 ring setups don't really work at all.

Posted 3 months ago #
joao3v16 - Member

I have a 2x9 setup, as I've never got round to buying a granny ring & haven't really missed it (except on one or two particularly steep climbs).

I can't imagine what benefit a 10-speed cassette would give me. Maybe I would if I tried one, but I've no complaints about the ratios available from my 11-34 combined with 36/46T chainrings.

Not a lot of my riding is very steep or slow/technical so I can get away with the above.

Posted 3 months ago #
njee20 - Member

nail > head. this is why im sticking 3x9.

But that's personal - I found I shifted far more with a triple, which was why I went 2x9.

I don't often spin it out, but I prefer to push a bigger gear (probably a result of SSing a lot) on the climbs, for most of the riding I do locally and the trails at Afan/Cwmcarn it's big ring all the way.

**swoons**

You hero! I assume you race? As you need higher gears than any world cup XC racer you must be rather handy!

Posted 3 months ago #
davesmate - Member

As I understand it you can use the whole cassette in either chainring on a 2x10 set up and you have just as many unique ratios as a 3x9 set up.

Willing to be proved wrong on both counts though!

Posted 3 months ago #
amedias - Member

**swoons**

You hero! I assume you race? As you need higher gears than any world cup XC racer you must be rather handy!

no, I'm not even that quick. I'm just not a spinner and prefer to push a bigger gear at a lower cadence even when going at the same pace as the guy next to me in the middle ring at a higher cadence.

It's not a boasting thing. I never said I *needed* massive gears due to speed, they just suit the way I ride better, and see comment about feedback on my bike with small chainrings, I'm normally up at the top of the cassette so in the same actual gear as most people in middle ring.

Posted 3 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Pages: 12 Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine

Bike Forum

Why is 2x10 considered an improvment on 3x9?

Reply »

Don't miss…

Singletrack

Website & Forums

Exits