[Closed] Is 1 x actually better?

Do you really want to start this one?

Do you really want to start this one?

No it’s a compromise. We will all return the to X2 in time.

Fetch the sacrificial kitten

My favourite set up is single speed, and my ideal would be something like a very light 3 speed gearbox with a climbing a cruising and high speed gear mounted in the bb.

Or just use a 3 speed hub

[img] [/img]

Yes.

I HATE

3 speed hubs

Forgot to ask is this 29r specific 1x of 650b specific and what colour is the bike?

Yes and no.

Good and bad.

Don't like it, don't do it.

Or just use a 3 speed hub

Current designs are too heavy, not well sealed etc

I have a Rohloff, great gear range, but too heavy and draggy.

Closest current one would be a Schlumpf mountain drive

Sometimes. Its prettier and slightly less faff.

But on big days and hills, I need more than 1x myself.

Yes

[img] [/img]

I was a late adopter, but I think, for the average rider at least, 1x is superior...
Wheel Weight?
I'd be better loosing some myself and getting fitter. 100-200g on the cassette is neither here nor there.
Tubeless solves the rotating weight issue too.
But the main advantage is when I'm halfway up a huge hill, I can just keep clicking the shifter and changing down and I'll get spot on shifts time after time and not have to stall my progress to change to a smaler chainring.

I run 3 x 9 and the only thing I dislike is the chain slap.

My favourite set up is single speed

You sound confused.

I don't think there is a Utopian solution to this. Pretty much every gearing system ever designed for bicycles has advantages/disadvantages.

pick one that suits what you do for as much of your riding as you can, and compromise* when it's not quite there.

*walk.

You sound confused.

I have 4 bikes, 1ss, 2 3x9 and a Rohloff'd

The benefits if gearbox bikes are true in terms of more 'active' suspension. However that doesn't mean there are no benefits to 1x set ups.

The benefits to a 1z setup are that they simplify the setup and handlebar controls (you may or may not care), they work slicker and better in muddy conditions (you may or may not care) and that released from the requirements of having to be able to mount a from mech you can make design changes to frame geometry and suspension that deliver benefits. I've always thought the benefits of 1x are not necessarily performance driven, but for other reasons. I like and prefer the simplicity of 1x.

A 12 speed cassette is heavier than an 8 or 9 speed cassette for sure......but in the grand scheme of the universe and the mass of the sun the difference is actually not that much, so if you're already got an 8 speed cassette bolted on the hub way out back, then 99% of the damage is already done and a handful more grams out there is not going to make any difference. However on a gearbox bike you are removing the cassette altogether, so a much greater difference in weight, but the biggest benefit to a gearbox bike and the performance of the suspension is the zero feedback rather than the unsprung weight. So definitely worth going for if you can afford a gearbox bike and accommodate the other downsides of a gearbox bike.

Ride 3x if you like. Nobody is judging you.

I have 4 bikes, 1ss, 2 3x9 and a Rohloff'd

You sound confused.

3x was great.
3x with the big ring removed was good.
2x with 26/38 is shite for me - always seem to be at the end of the range.
1x aint too bad.

Oh and for the OP define better or we can't judge it properly

Ride 3x if you like. Nobody is judging you

Genuine question, not worried about being judged.

Id rather have no derailleur.

It just seems to me that the bike industry is giving us what they want, rather than what would really benefit us.

But hey ho thats capitalism for you ! 😉

Hopefully the cost of gearbox bikes will come down and the weight too.

I thought we'd picked a different animal for [i]"1x is shite"[/i] threads, kitten deaths were reserved for wheel size whinging...

I thought we'd picked a different animal for "1x is shite" threads, kitten deaths were reserved for wheel size whinging...

[img][url= https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4684/27571788989_4199b3a7b8_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4684/27571788989_4199b3a7b8_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/J1qChe ]seal pup[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/154588905@N08/ ]Cameron Gray[/url], on Flickr[/img]

As much as I've appreciated going back to 2x on the Wazoo in the last few months after a year on 1x, enabling me to use the granny 24T chainring again to tackle Dell Road's ~20% peak gradient without breaking my knees, I rarely use the 11-13-15T sprockets when using the 38T chainring unless I choose to actively pedal downhill.

When using 1x with a 34T On One Ringmaster, I used each of the 11-30T sprockets fairly evenly, its only downfall was hill reps up that Dell Road hill I discovered in September would leave my knees aching after the ride. For more normal gradient hills, it was fine.

1x was more a choice of convenience for me.

Hardly ever in small or big rings, and then only because I was being lazy on the hills, or had the wind behind me on a long stright flat downhill. Losing the mech, cable and derailleur made for less to go wrong/fix/clean/collect mud etc.

If I spent a lot of time bashing out miles on double track and tarmac and generally smoother trails, I'd want the gear steps that a 2x or 3x system offers for cadence, but I don't.

Nearly all my rides are sub 20 miles in the winter (mostly under 15!) and sub 30 in the summer, with nearly all of it on janky singletrack and surfaces rough enough that pedalling cadence is a luxury other people have. Sure, I might have a mile or two here or there were I could make use of 2x or 3x, but overall, it wouldn't really provide a return on the extra complexity of packing an extra mech cable and shifter.

I found old school 3x fine, but found with 2x that I was either at the top of the cassette or the bottom, which doesn't give you the flexible immediacy of that sneaky rear mech shift up/down for those on demand super quick adjustments on the trail - I found I had to back off, shift to the other ring at the front and then dump a load of gears in the opposite direction on the cassette. This was not really that great for my general riding.

There has to be an impact on suspension performance from the increased cassette mass, but I've not noticed it over the old 34t one I used to run. Lighter? maybe a bit, but its not really a factor. Chainline is a big issue IMO. Its much more important to get this right with a 1x system. I'm not convinced that pushing it outboard by 3mm at the front and the back as industry has done with boost is optimum and the absence of a front mech makes it much easier to tweak.

The real reason that I went 1x is dropper post controls and the aformentioned 2x unhappiness. I just couldn't isolate front mech and dropper levers in my brain when factoring it in all toghter in the and got into all sorts of bother. It very significantly nerfed my riding experience. Since I'm only interested in overall range and not gear steps, there wasn't really anything keeping me to 2x.

I'd be really interested in a gearbox mtb, but the aggro framed 29 hardtail I have in mind are few and far between and bloody expensive!

So anyway. Is 1x really better for what exactly?

I prefer it, don't know if it's better or not.

I hated getting caught out on a steeper than expected climb and choosing whether to try and muscle it out or risk knackering the chain shifting to the little ring. In the end I spent most (probably 95%) of my time in the middle ring of a 3x set up. Now I just keep clicking until it feels ok, or dig in if I run out of clicks, which hasn't happened yet.

No thoughts on the suspension action though, I'm HT only so it doesn't matter to me.

I have tried 1x a couple of times, and it's like going half way to SS - a bit less thought, just click one button if you want to spin more and another if you want to spin less. Never get caught needing to shift rings at an awkward moment.

The only thing that keeps me on 2x is getting a good range without being a millionaire - 1x is fine for races and you can get almost the same range (and all the bits of it that I'd really need) by going 1x12 with a huge sprocket, but I don't have the money for that and 1x10 which would be within my economic grasp just doesn't get close to the range of a 2x.

And that's before you get to being able to design a bike without having to leave space for the front mech. Shorter stays and bigger wheels and tyres are both good things IMHO.

The unsprung mass doesn't really come into it, I'm not really that much of a true princess (as in the one with the pea) to be able to tell the difference.

This year I went from a 3x9 bike to a 1x11 and for the riding I do it works for me. The bar controls are neater, the gear range is right and the bike is quieter. Happy days.

The only thing that keeps me on 2x is getting a good range without being a millionaire

New design of high end suspension:

to get this perfect a 1x has big advantages. It's an chainline issue. Reaction of suspension will CHANGE when chain moves in 3x or 2x system on front mechanics.
Unsprung mass: gets worse with 1x.
But dedicated suspension design with 1x and constant cog in front mech is more important to get the suspension right.

But:
I don't need the "perfect" suspension and I'am a fan of low cost 2x10.
My low cost stuff just feels perfect to me...

Went 1 x n (7 at the time IIRC) in 2001 on my Trailstar. No idea whether it's 'better' as such - for me it's simpler and just what I'm used to.

Probably best not to listen to me though - I keep thinking about going back to gripshift too...

both my on and off road touring bikes have 3x9 drive trains

i have 1x10 on my ibis and it works for the purposes of that bike but i hate the gaps between the gears - when your tapping out miles all day long being able to selct the right gear to get into your happy zone cadence is a huge factor for me.

if i can ride up scottish hills in the snow on a 1x geared 40lb fat bike no one needs 2x or 3x on a trail bike anywhere

But hey ho thats capitalism for you !

Hopefully the cost of gearbox bikes will come down and the weight too.

All depends if there is enough demand for them, doesn't look like there is as nobody is paying what is required to have them. Now that's capitalism for you.

Agree completely that it’s more of a ‘if you like’ situation than ‘better’, just like tubeless or wheelsize. Industry needs scale for viability though, so as with most new things that don’t wither on the MY catalogue page, if you don’t like the new thing it’s likely you’ll be left hoovering up NOS spares until your preferred niche is the hot new thing again.

The whole ‘massive cassette hanging on rear’ thing is a bit FUD though. Admittedly the Shimano examples could be better, but generally cassette weights haven’t increased massively since 11-36 10sp M771. They do weigh a little more, yes, but not the boat-anchor planet destroying amounts some detractors seem to think.

rOcKeTdOg - Member
if i can ride up scottish hills in the snow on a 1x geared 40lb fat bike no one needs 2x or 3x on a trail bike anywhere

What are you basing that on exactly? Is everyone on a par with you in terms of fitness, skills and confidence? MTBing as a sport has a wide demographic and broad spread of abilities - I don't think that everyone can or should be compared to any other rider.

doesn't look like there is as nobody is paying what is required to have them

Maybe not on MTBs in the UK, but they're starting to make more inroads in Germany and other places in Europe for town and touring... a few off-the-peg Pinion options for town and trekking bikes now at non-ridiculous prices.

Give them a few more years and re-evaluate.

I have no opinion hugely either way, but to be on the safe side I have punched a kitten in the face 😥

What are you basing that on exactly? Is everyone on a par with you in terms of fitness, skills and confidence?

H s probably basing it on the fact you can have the same bottom gear on a 1x setup as you can on 3x
I used to use a 22/32 bottom gear. I now use a 34/46 bottom gear. My old ratio is 17.9 gear inches, my new one 19.2. Which isn’t much different and I have no issues with it, and I only run out of high gears on the road. (I’m not a spinner either)
If I switched to a SRAM cassette with 10-50 rather than my 11-46 Shimano XT, I’d have a lower bottom gear of 17.8in and a higher top gear too.
It’s really not rocket science and very easy to explain.
I was tuning 2x9 10 years ago with 22/36 and 11-34 and having no problems at all. Less gears seems better to me, and I’m a fat old fart! 🙂

woooo bigger gaps between gears - must be able to get another cassette between the gaps on a 10-50 😀

MTB?
Possibly.
Depends.

Road/mixed use?
Nope.

What are you basing that on exactly? Is everyone on a par with you in terms of fitness, skills and confidence? MTBing as a sport has a wide demographic and broad spread of abilities - I don't think that everyone can or should be compared to any other rider.

overweight, 50yo on a fatbike around the tweed valley in the snow, i'm no olympian so anyone younger, lighter and with a non wide tyred bike that weighs as much as a 90s DH bike should cope with 1x
HTH

skills and confidence?