Forum menu
I got hold of an old Spesh Myka for my 10 year old daughter. She tried it for size and rode it with the original 3 x 8 gearing and loved it, but was confused by the combination of shifters with reversed functions. So I put a 9 speed cassette and rear mech/shifter on it and replaced the triple chainrings with a single oval narrow-wide and she rode it in the woods for the first time yesterday. She now loves the bike and said the gears now make much more sense. I can't argue with her as my last 3 bikes have been 1 x drivetrains (inc 1 converted from 3 x). So it's official now.... no mountain bike should be allowed anything other than a single chainring.
Yeah good luck with this thread - you’re probably going to get some stick from people who love 2x / 3x because either it’s cheaper to run (consumables), they absolutely can’t get the range they need from 1x or they’re old duffers / don’t like change (also probably don’t like dropper posts) 😝
Folks have short-term memories - the fact that we don't have long threads titled "chainsuck hell" is such a testament. There was a time that riding longer than 2 hours in winter was difficult before your drivetrain completely stopped working but thanks to clutch mechs and 1x cranks it's rarely an impediment.
It does make so much sense for kids, although I do still remember the days when I was wee and listed after 21 (yes, 21!!!) gears that my mate Paul's muddy fox had instead of the 3 that I had 🙂
Oh, and chainsuck. Wow. What powerfully horrific memory you,ve brought back. Argh, chainsuck so bad that it actually takes chunks out of your chainstay, or jams so hard that the ride is over. Wow, I’d really forgotten about that benefit, thanks for bringing back the PTSD!
Agreed!
I'm happy with a front mech on my road bike, but I'll never put one back on my mtb.
the fact that we don’t have long threads titled “chainsuck hell” is such a testament
This.
Front mechs should have stayed on road bikes, their (long) reign on mountain bikes was a misstep, and now over.
I just did a 1x conversion on my road bike. Works for me, I hate front mechs.
Just tools for a job - I have singles on my mountain and cross bike (which work really well) but I can't see me moving away from a front mech on my road bike at the moment (not that the OP was talking about road bikes!)
If I started getting loads of hassle from the front mech on the roadie I'd no doubt reconsider but I don't... 😊
I just moved my 10 year-old up to a 26" bike. Considered going 1x but I have a lot of 9 speed stuff so went with 2x9. 24-34 double up front with 11-34 out back. She's still happy to ride round the park, along the beach front, etc., so no big hills and just uses it like a 1x9. When I finally manage to coax her into riding off road, I'll just put it in the little ring at the bottom of the hill.
If I changed my Marasa to 1x and removed the front mech that limits the rear tyre clearance by at least 2cm, I'd easily have room for a 2.35" slick and Beavertail XL guard, as it is the biggest tyre I can fit with that particular guard is ~35mm...
Not much use for slippy conditions like we've had this week, so rear guard removed at cost of muddy water over drivetrain in order to fit knobbly 38mm ice spiker tyres at both ends, bring on the tropical south coast weather as of tomorrow! 😆
On yeah, neither of my mountain bikes have front mechs either.
What about for those of us living in areas where we have road sections to join up the trails??
Whilst I tend to agree with the sentiment re 1x MTBs when its used purely off road, I went 1x and after 18 months went back to a front mech set-up for my own 'real world' riding.
What about for those of us living in areas where we have road sections to join up the trails??
36:10 on a 2.4 29er is the same gear as 52:13 o a 700x 23.
I appreciate this may not work with your existing setup but "because roads" isn't really an argument.
What about for those of us living in areas where we have road sections to join up the trails??
Pretty much my scenario and 1x is still better. 32T up front and 11-42T cassette and I'm rarely using the 11T, when I do I'm doing 30km/h or more (32x11 @85rpm is 34.5km/h), i.e. roadie speeds, which on an MTB isn't sustainable. If it was then I'd be a pro rider!
What about for those of us living in areas where we have road sections to join up the trails??
I ride road to every trail, I hardly every drive anywhere. I still have 1x on my MTBs, because on the flat I am not even in top gear (34/11 or 32/11) and on downhills I can get to about 40kph easily without spinning like a loon, a bit more if I do. That's fast enough for simply getting to and from trails. I have 2x on my actual road bike though and it's staying.
Another nice advantage of 1x is clearance for trousers, if you find yourself wearing them.
Didn’t we all start riding bikes with a 1 x 3.
It was called a Sturmy Archer or am I just showing my age!
Not dropped a chain since I went x1.
The big plus is suspension kinematics - as you've got a stable front ring it you can select an anti-squat curve with fewer compromises.
Not dropped a chain until I ditched the front mech.
Of course the real answer is a fixed. No nasty complicated gears.
To me a big issue is those stupid little sprockets and chain rings. Mechanically appalling.
55:22 belt drive SS for the big win.
Why are little sprockets stupid then Mattsccm ?
Of course the real answer is a fixed. No nasty complicated gears.
Yep, came to that conclusion in 2001 and not used gears since.
Of course the real answer is a fixed. No nasty complicated gears
Or a balance bike. No BB bearings to replace
1x is the only thing that should be used on entry-mid level city bikes and kids bikes. The simplicity of up or down makes sense. Like a car gearbox, not a truck.
Out of my 4 bikes only one has a front mech, my Vagabond, and I quite like that for load lugging hilly stuff. Otherwise 1x across the board..
I’m a Luddite and can confirm that 1x is better in an MTB.
Not good on a road bike and questionable on a gravel/cross bike mind you.
I've got too many 9s rear mechs to use up to convert!
The big plus is suspension kinematics – as you’ve got a stable front ring it you can select an anti-squat curve with fewer compromises
@ajt123 is there a website that explains that? I never understood/bought that your suspension would behave differently dependant on chainring size.
I never understood/bought that your suspension would behave differently dependant on chainring size
Prob makes far less difference to some bikes than others. Dave Weagle has made some good points about how 2 or 3 chainrings are not necessarily a problem and can be beneficial once the angle of the bike and rider's c of g is considered eg when climbing.
If you look at the older entries it will show you kinematics for double chain ring bikes. You can see they are quite different.
The rear cog makes a difference too, but that's less problematic, as you tend to use the smaller cogs when deeper into your travel.
If the chainring size is static, you can pick your level of antisquat and then build your level of antirise and leverage ratio around that.
Yes, would expect designs to have changed with chainring numbers over the years.
This post from Ben Pinnick illustrates the effect of rear cog size.
If you decrease the size of the front chainring it ratchets up the graph. So, let's say you were aiming at 120% antisquat at sag, dropping to the little ring might bounce that to 140, or 160%! I don't know.
The takeaway is that multiple chainrings multiplies the amount of trade offs in a suspension design, and tends to create a quirky feel, where the suspension becomes spiky under load, or overly squishy.
So, let’s say you were aiming at 120% antisquat at sag, dropping to the little ring might bounce that to 140, or 160%! I don’t know.
What I took from Dave Weagle's article on it was that when moving to the little ring you'd be likely to be riding uphill and have changed where your C of G is on the bike and the increase in antisquat had benefits in that situ. But I won't pretend I have experience with it all to comment on it - just was an interesting defence of something that was already on the way out at the time he wrote it.
Interesting. Maybe I am a sunbconcious luddite! I found I was spinning out the 32 on any local rides, progressively swapped to bigger chainrings (38 was biggest I found at the time) then felt overgeared when I was anywhere steep.
Either way, Im still happily running a front mech. I like having that big ring if I need to crank it along the street to next junction before some truck/bus ends up sat behind me
I must admit I thought I would be the last person to go to 1x but when I could eventually afford a 1x11 setup I found the bottom gear was low enough and the top gear was almost high enough for a mountain bike. Yes I suppose I’d like a higher top gear sometimes but it’s ok.
And I can use my dropper remote more easily now which is the main reason I made the swap in the end.
I have a gravel bike and I don’t think I’ll go 1x on that as I need the very low gears for the steep hills round here but also high gears for the road use. But that’s ok, my gravel bike is more of a do it all bike so it’s probably required for me. If it was more of a bike packing sort of bike, more off road biased I might go 1x but when I can eventually get a GRX groupset it’ll be a 2x version.
Totally makes sense for kids and anyone new to bikes though - 1 lever for harder, one for easier!
If the chainring size is static, you can pick your level of antisquat and then build your level of antirise and leverage ratio around that.
I think this is much more of a theoretical problem than a practical one. Offroad, you pretty much never use the big ring on a triple, so they are effectively a 2x with an extra big ring for cruising on road. The middle ring is generally similar size to a 1x ring (typically 32-36 tooth). This is what you used most of the time, so the suspension will be optimized for this, just as with a single ring. The times that suspension performance really matters, like fast, rough descents, you will be doing very little pedaling anyway. The small ring is only used for winching up steep climbs. Affecting the suspension performance there isn't such a huge compromise. I've never really found suspension performance to be a drawback with 2x9 setups.
With a 1x, you need a much larger range on your rear sprocket than with a 2x. Typically 500% compared with 300%. That also affects the angle of the chain, so it should be a consideration in suspension design.