[Closed] Single-ring 'Bullying'

Not enough random capitalisation and one really weak swear word.

2/10 or should that be 2 x 10?

Just ignore them, they're mostly harmless.

Journalist in hyperbole shocker 😉

I'm with you on this, and that's despite three out of my four bikes having a single chainring, it really doesn't matter.

I'd love to see them getting up some proper hills on a single, well, unless running a 40/42 on the rear. Simple fact is, not all of us can or will afford the £60 cassettes etc. I think i could get up most stuff on a 42 rear, but as i say, it means then shelling out for a potential pile of new bits which could run into the hundreds £££

Alright Grandad calm down!

I consider myself superior for bucking the single chainring trend. Well, that, and mechanically/technically incompetent.

weeksy - Member
I'd love to see them getting up some proper hills on a single, well, unless running a 40/42 on the rear. Simple fact is, not all of us can or will afford the £60 cassettes etc. I think i could get up most stuff on a 42 rear, but as i say, it means then shelling out for a potential pile of new bits which could run into the hundreds £££

40 or 42? None of them will be running that. They'll all be on 12spd 50t.

It's not exactly new. Off the top of my head, we've had the same thing with riser bars, bar widths, stem lengths, droppers etc. etc.

I remember MBR telling me in 2002 that fingerless gloves were no good, and you had to have full-finger gloves as 'MTB has more in common with MX than road cycling'. Eh?

It's just rubbish. You have to remember that magazines are only viable because of marketing. It's important for them to create a sense of redundancy and inadequacy around 'old' kit.

n.b. new kit likely to be better than old kit, progress a real thing etc and basically it's all just a mindless but very enjoyable waste of time and money

40 or 42? None of them will be running that. They'll all be on 12spd 50t.

What's that coming in at price wise to jump from 10 speed? £400 ? £500 ? new wheel/hub ? cranks, cassette, chain, shifter, mech....

I get the op's argument (don't necessarily agree), but you're right if you're riding and happy then all is good.

I don't get the subsequent posts

I'd love to see them getting up some proper hills on a single, well, unless running a 40/42 on the rear.

That's the point isn't it, buy a wider range cassette so you can get up the hills.

Just had a look at the Evans website - £44 for XT 10 speed cassette vs £60 for 11 speed.

£44 for XT 10 speed cassette vs £60 for 11 speed.

That's assuming you have the rest of the bits, it's not just the cassette you need.

rammymtb earlier today....

[img] [/img]

FWIW, I find the oneby a great solution. Much neater and leaves space for the dropper lever.

I ride in the alps much of the time and haven't had a problem getting up the hills/mountains.

Off-road I'm running out of puff/grip/determination before I run out of gears.

Never worried about caning it down on tarmac.

@OP

Bike journalism is really all about pushing the next big thing. It's easy to see why, manufacturer advertising keeps bike magazines in business which is why so few made a fuss about the constant influx of new standards as a way of making last year's bike suddenly obsolete.

As a consumer, the ultimate power rests with you. If you object to a particular manufacturer's endless and non-transferable new standards, then buy your components or complete bike from someone else. One particular manufacturer is at the top of my "don't buy from" list because of exactly this reason. Likewise, you may even stop buying a particular publication of the journalists hyperbole offends.

OP it's only bullying if you let it affect you

Fit that non-dropper seat post as well

[img] [/img]

I have a triple on a 9spd setup, and my dropper post is broken. So there.

It's easy to see why, manufacturer advertising keeps bike magazines in business which is why so few made a fuss about the constant influx of new standards as a way of making last year's bike suddenly obsolete

Sure, but old bikes are mostly horrible. Try riding something from 20 years ago with rim brakes, 2" elastomer forks, narrow bars, long stem, non-dropper seatpost.

Greg Callaghan and T-Mo both still use doubles in the EWS and seem to be managing OK with it. FWIW, I run Eagle and will never switch back, but it doesn't mean it's for everyone.

rammymtb - Member
I'm just about fed up with MTB journalists calling people stuff like 'dinosaurs' for not having a single chainring set up.

Me too.

There is a particular journo in this months ST that has referred to 'the 3 people left that don't yet have single a single chainring'.

Singletrack used to be different.
I lost an awful lot of respect for them when 650b was accepted without any kind of objective analysis of the pros and cons.
Likewise with pretty much every new standard since.

It's just rubbish. You have to remember that magazines are only viable because of marketing. It's important for them to create a sense of redundancy and inadequacy around 'old' kit.

Yup.

I tried a 1x11 for the first time ever on my mates new bike. I ran out of gears and really wanted a bigger front ring. I shan't be changing the triple set up on my bikes any time soon.

I consider myself superior for bucking the single chainring trend. Well, that, and mechanically/technically incompetent.

[img] [/img]

I tried a 1x11 for the first time ever on my mates new bike. I ran out of gears and really wanted a bigger front ring. I shan't be changing the triple set up on my bikes any time soon.

Swoon.

That rant in the OP reads very much like a letter in the MBR. You should try sending it in, you'll maybe win a prize.

I think if you're buying/building up a new bike then 1x makes a lot of sense. But the idea that you should scrap a perfectly good drivechain is obviously silly. I took one of my old bikes out with its positively prehistoric 3*8 setup at the weekend and could find anything not to like about it. 🙂

Perhaps I'm blind to it, but I don't see any kind of gear 'snobbery'. Quite the reverse when you look away from magazines and into forum land. Where you get the usual reverse snobbery and judgement if you spend the money on the latest kit such as eagle. I don't care what people are riding as long as they are out. Unless it's a fat smoker on a e bike...seen a few of them lately

So, who [b]are [/b]the other two?

Bullying? Oh do please piss off and stop whining!
Im so fed up with people claiming they're being bullied, when in actual fact they are being presented with facts or differing opinions. Makes me want to repeatedly harm them. Now thats bullying!

Back to the OP, I have a 3 x9 drivetrain with no dropper post and I couldn't give a rats ass what magazines tell me I should be riding. They've been doing it for years and I care not.

[img] [/img]

@Rorschach 😆

Another 3x9 rider* - I hate hearing all this moaning from riders on these new-fangled double ring setups.

* I've also never had a dropper, have 26" wheels, an ISIS BB, flat bars and bar ends and a long stem, it's still just as much fun as it ever was and the only reason I'm slower is my lack of fitness.

So, who are the other two?

an ISIS BB

Careful, now!

[quote=hols2 ]Sure, but old bikes are mostly horrible. Try riding something from 20 years ago with rim brakes, 2" elastomer forks, narrow bars, long stem, non-dropper seatpost.

Try moving forwards a few years - most stuff was fundamentally fixed shortly after that - over 15 years ago I had a susser with well sorted suspension, decent forks and disk brakes, the more recent stuff might be slightly better but there haven't been any revolutions in the last 10 years. The proliferation of new standards which have resulted in marginal improvements has largely been due to bikes being fundamentally sorted. Try riding a 10 year old bike and you'll find it's not horrible at all, just "obsolete".

At some point I'll go single ring, but my triple 9-speed setup refuses to wear out. Possibly something to do with not riding it much...

over 15 years ago I had a susser with well sorted suspension

Modern full suss bikes are light years ahead of their predecessors of 15 years ago. I'm happy for you that you like your bikes, I don't care what people ride, but this statement is tosh of the highest order.

[quote=Nobeerinthefridge ]Modern full suss bikes are light years ahead of their predecessors of 15 years ago.

Compare me a 2017 Orange 5 with a 2002 Orange 5...

aracer - Member

Try moving forwards a few years - most stuff was fundamentally fixed shortly after that - over 15 years ago I had a susser with well sorted suspension, decent forks and disk brakes, the more recent stuff might be slightly better but there haven't been any revolutions in the last 10 years. The proliferation of new standards which have resulted in marginal improvements has largely been due to bikes being fundamentally sorted. Try riding a 10 year old bike and you'll find it's not horrible at all, just "obsolete".

You don't have to go very far back at all to reach 'decent bike, but obsolete'.
My 2010 Stumpjumper FSR rides great, but is 'technically obsolete' I suppose.
3x9, 26" wheels, no dropper, QRs (although it has one of those DT Swiss front axles). I mean.....the headtube on the alloy versions was straight for god's sake!! It was only a warranty upgrade to the carbon version that got me a new fangled tapered steerer!!

Of course, I could switch to a more modern groupset and invest in a dropper post but I don't really have the funds or the inclination. If I was gonna change anything, it would probably be a dropper, over a more trendy groupset.

Regarding the OP - just ignore it. I can't really say I've noticed this 'bullying' but that's probably 'cos I just don't give a shit about it.

Sure, but old bikes are mostly horrible. Try riding something from 20 years ago with rim brakes, 2" elastomer forks, narrow bars, long stem, non-dropper seatpost.

Change rim brakes for disc brakes and you have got yourself a ... GRAVEL BIKE!

I've got both, it makes no difference going up, but I'm definitely faster going down on 2x.

It's total personal preference. There are positives and negatives on both sides. 2x10 weighs more and potentially has more that could go wrong, 1x10/1x11 etc is lighter due to a lot of metal not being there and arguably more convenient and reliable, but a shift failure leaves you with no gear shifting whatever where 2x10 would likely leave you 1x10 or 2x1 in the same situation.

Range doesn't seem to be the major obstacle many of the naysayers seem to fear. This [img] [/img] shows you a comparative illustration with ratios, speed, cadence etc of my old 26/38 11-34 preferred 2x10 configuration against a 36 11-42. The 1x gives up about half a gear at either end, broadly it's covering the same range. I'd say that was acceptable to most. Making it an 11-46 will iron out the bottom end and give you the same climbing range as my old 2x10 had. So long as people don't assume a big cassette automatically grants better climbing when changing everything else too, I'm struggling to see a technical issue here but clearly there's no reason that you can't choose to run whatever gearing (or lack of) makes you happy.

Compare me a 2017 Orange 5 with a 2002 Orange 5...

I said modern.

Does this mean Hammerschmidt is dead then?