[Closed] Soo.. who else is switching from 2x10 back to 3x9 / 3x10??

Nope. 1x10 on everything MTB.

same as Jam Bo. Can't imagine why you'd need more than 1x10.

Same here - 1x10 on both bikes and it feels spot on for the riding I do. Occasionally change the cassette if I'm heading to the hills.

why do you need more than 1x10. 34t front and a 34/11 back.

Just get stronger.

[i]Can't imagine why you'd need more than 1x10. [/i]

So you don't have to push?

why do you need more than 1x10. 34t front and a 34/11 back.

Just get stronger.

Have you ever done a 24 hour solo or a 7 day mountain bike stage race? Come back to me with a different answer if you haven't. The last thing I want to be doing in an endurance event is haven't to grind up a steep single-track switchback climb with low cadence in my lowest gear with 2x10, thinking about how much I want my granny gear back!

I can see how 2x10 / 1x10 might have some advantages, but not for my type of racing.

I feel like the 2x10 on my Camber isn't progress over my normal 2x9... It's got some higher gears that I don't have much use for, and less low gears. But 1x10 with an 11-36 block is definately progress.

Have you ever done a 24 hour solo or a 7 day mountain bike stage race? Come back to me with a different answer if you haven't. The last thing I want to be doing in an endurance event is haven't to grind up a steep single-track switchback climb with low cadence in my lowest gear with 2x10, thinking about how much I want my granny gear back!
I can see how 2x10 / 1x10 might have some advantages, but not for my type of racing.

What are the winners running? I'd say just get stronger still applies...

Can't wait until the Olympic XC event to see what the top riders are using.

If a triple suits your style and you enjoy it more then that's the answer.

Nope, 2x9 is plenty.

Can't wait until the Olympic XC event to see what the top riders are using.

Cyclocross bikes from the look of the course...

What are the winners running? I'd say just get stronger still applies...

Easy to say, not so easy to apply at 8am the next day.

I haven't encountered anything I can't keep a 60rpm cadence going for in 34t 11-36t yet, and that includes the alps.

Never gonna happen! 2x10 for a couple of years now, love it.
Male Olympians at Hadleigh will be running new SRAM 1x11, Shimano riders 1x10. I can see myself going that way sometime soon.

2x10 on my Mojo for enduros such as Dyfi, CRC, Brecon Beast and Afan Monster. That is a 42:28 with a 11:36 and still find I'm in the 42 most of the time

* swoons at the STW strongmen *

What kind of terrain are you happy 2x10 users riding? The South Downs or something similar to that? 😕

continuity - Member
I haven't encountered anything I can't keep a 60rpm cadence going for in 34t 11-36t yet, and that includes the alps.

1x10 (32 and 11/36). No issues and rode up everything in the Alps recently.

1x10 (32 and 11/36). No issues and rode up everything in the Alps recently.

Just because you can ride up it, doesn't mean you wouldn't be more efficient with a better gear ratio and higher cadence.

I can "ride up" most things with my 2x10, I'm often in a lower cadence than I feel comfortable in though.

Yet you would be quicker and more efficient with a higher cadence.

No you wouldn't, it depends on the rider. higher cadence is more efficient but bigger gear out of the saddle is faster as you can generate more power. Just not as efficient.

I can "ride up" most things with my 2x10, I'm often in a lower cadence than I feel comfortable in though.

So you need to get stronger then.

Don't look for excuses as to why you can't do things, look at how you can. If lower gears works for you fine, if a triple makes sense fine, use it.

But the important thing, just because you have a gear doesn't mean you should use it. The only way to get better is to push harder.

I've just built up my new bike with 3x10 as didn't really see the point in 2x10.

1x10 and losing the front shifter makes sense but I like having the variety of big and little gears

Though 1x10 does seem a bit of a current "fashion statement" that has taken over from single speeding.

Went from 1x9 to 3x9. Cos I'm a pathetic weakling.

WTF OP? (and you ^^)

20 gears is more than enough to ride anything, You've simply chosen inappropriate chainring sizes for you and your riding.

I've been happily running 2x8 for over 15years with no issues,

Im not the fittest bloke on the planet, but I recently changed to 2x10 and ill never go back to 3x10, a 2x10 always seems to be the 'right' gear when riding...true I miss the granny ring when im knackered but the harder the 2x10 setup sometimes is, just means youll get stronger and fitter 🙂

Why are you removing your granny ring to go to two rings instead of removing the middle and big ring and replacing the middle with something sized somewhere between the two? 😕

32:16 is plenty 😉

GW I'd love to go on a ride with you. In between never sitting down and your 2x8, you've got to be the fittest person around with sprinter esq legs if steel

So you need to get stronger then.

No, I need to go back to 3 rings on the front. 🙄

It does seem like its a bit of a macho man statement people are trying to make here, as if you need to show off your hardness and push through with the 2 / 1x10, in sort of a "GGRRRRR look at me" type way. Slightly pathetic really.
I don't see the point in going 1 or 2 by ten unless

A) You ride mostly in the South Downs.
B) You're an XC racer and rarely out of the big ring.
C) You are a total weight weenie and want to save the 10 gram's, or whatever it is.

20 gears is more than enough to ride anything.

Vaguest statement of the year award goes to you, well done 😉 .

I looked at 2x10, glad I didn't spend the money.

I'm reasonably fit and able (my Strava times show that), but every-so-often you need a granny (and 34 rear) otherwise you'll be pushing.

But at the time I looked the reason I didn't buy was the simple reason that an XTR 2x10 was heavier than my current XTR 3x9.

I now live in the Scottish Borders, and while 2x10 would be fine for GT/Inners etc it would mean a lot of pushing on the natural stuff.

No, I need to go back to 3 rings on the front.

Have a look at a gear chart and you will see that most gears are duplicated if not triplicated, which is one of the points behind 2x*

Have you ever done a 24 hour solo or a 7 day mountain bike stage race?

If your racing you need to get stronger. There are reasons why 2x* makes sense.

If you want to go back to 3x* do so, but be aware that if you pick the right chainrings and cassette there is very little benefit to be gained. and you do gain a few problems.

As for climb size, Le Chable to Col de Gentiannes in the Val de Bagnes on a 2x9, in prep for the Grand Raid Cristalp. Is that a big enough climb?

Climb hardness has nothing to do with size, the south downs vs the Cairngorms, they are different nothing more.

michaelmcc - Member

It does seem like its a bit of a macho man statement people are trying to make here, as if you need to show off your hardness and push through with the 2/1 x10, in sort of a "GGRRRRR look at me" type way. Slightly pathetic really...

don't most people 'go' 2up at the front by removing the big ring?

GGRRRRR look at me, i'm also a pathetic weakling, i never use the 40tooth ring so i took it off.

If memory serves, going from a 22-32-44 to a 22-36 cost me only the 2 highest ratios- so not a case of never using the big ring, you need to be using everything on the big ring to make it worth keeping.

I have 3 singlespeeds. Form an ordely queue to come and touch me.

Vaguest statement of the year award goes to you, well done

Read what Northwind wrote above ^^

.

.

Transapp - I didn't sit down or change gear all afternoon today, but no, I'm hellishly unfit just now. 🙁

For real time XC riding in the longterm I can't imagine why anyone would go 2x or 1x or singlespeed and balls to a 3x with 24 and 42, I want 22 and 44....as much range as you can get.

Emperor's New clothes!

real time XC in the 11/42 = fireroad at best (and tucking would be quicker than pedalling)

All the stuff is still made so you can have what ever you prefer
But I would suggest some people rember that 10 speed rear cassettes can have a 36 big cog and that there are gear inch charts out there to compare ratios with

michaelmcc wrote:

It does seem like its a bit of a macho man statement people are trying to make here, as if you need to show off your hardness and push through with the 2 / 1x10, in sort of a "GGRRRRR look at me" type way. Slightly pathetic really.
I don't see the point in going 1 or 2 by ten unless

A) You ride mostly in the South Downs.
B) You're an XC racer and rarely out of the big ring.
C) You are a total weight weenie and want to save the 10 gram's, or whatever it is.

I don't race. I don't care about being macho. I like to enjoy my XC / trail / bikepacking rides. I run 1x10, 32/11-36.

A) I ride Edinburgh / pentlands / GT / the highlands
B) I don't race, and hardly ever used my big ring (oooh err)
C) I do like a light bike. Ditching the front derailleur, two rings, cable, and front shifter saves 450 grams. That is enough to make a difference for almost anyone.

Also:

+ 32/36 at the back is only 2 gears short of the lowest granny gear
+ 32/11 is 2 or 3 gears short of the highest gear on a 3x9
+ Front deralleurs are the work of the devil. They are Heath Robinson botches, ugly, unreliable, extra weight and complexity
+ 44 teeth whirring round exposed inches from your ankle / leg / body / logs / rocks sucks for off road
+ Bashrings are good
+ If you are winching yourself up a hill in 22/32, walking is probably more efficient
+ People run singlespeed 2:1 over most terrain. 1x10 is being spoiled for choice.
+ Having to push a low gear that isn't winching yourself uphill makes you stronger and is more satisfying
+ The 44 ring is only for flying downhill on fireroads and roads. Chill out and freewheel, it is more fun and saves energy.
+ 1xn looks cleaner, and is easier to clean.

I could go on, but I'll stop my 1xn evangelizing there. It's not for everyone, and choice and experimentation are good things. Choose what you fancy / think you will enjoy, experiment, have fun!

I don't see the point in going 1 or 2 by ten unless

Or you need the chain stability (because you actually enjoy technical trails) and easy maintainable of 1x10 and you don't have the legs of a little girl?

Ok, if you're all so tough and manly then why aren't you all spinning out the highest gear on downhills which happens to me??

And it's not really a case of getting stronger or tougher as a lot of you have said, Ive done five 24 hour solo races and I'm probably fitter/stronger than most people here.

If your racing you need to get stronger. There are reasons why 2x* makes sense.

If you want to go back to 3x* do so, but be aware that if you pick the right chainrings and cassette there is very little benefit to be gained. and you do gain a few problems.

Seems like you have more problems with 1x or 2x with the rate the rear mech wears out.

As for climb size, Le Chable to Col de Gentiannes in the Val de Bagnes on a 2x9, in prep for the Grand Raid Cristalp. Is that a big enough climb?

Really depends on the gradient, I'm not familiar with that climb.

Climb hardness has nothing to do with size, the south downs vs the Cairngorms, they are different nothing more.

Well South Downs are rolling and mellow so no probs on a 2x or 1x, haven't ridden Cairngorms but I imagine the climbs are steeper and longer. I know you can have a hard steep climb thats reasonably short, and these kind of climbs one after another are when the granny ring comes in handy.

Double post.

Ok, if you're all so tough and manly then why aren't you all spinning out the highest gear on downhills which happens to me??

I feel the lowest gear isn't low enough,

mcc are you thick?
you fella have a fast cadence others however do not. simple really.

+ The 44 ring is only for flying downhill on fireroads and roads. Chill out and freewheel, it is more fun and saves energy.

And is a lot slower for racing - you can't win in an event like Kielder 100 with less than a 42 up front I imagine.

+ If you are winching yourself up a hill in 22/32, walking is probably more efficient

It's slower if you add in the time of mountain and dismounting every time.

+ Having to push a low gear that isn't winching yourself uphill makes you stronger and is more satisfying

Ok, if you're all so tough and manly then why aren't you all spinning out the highest gear on downhills which happens to me??

I feel the lowest gear isn't low enough,

FFS, make your mind up.

Makes perfect sense.

you can't win in an event like Kielder 100 with less than a 42 up front I imagine.

mcc are you thick?

and yet you can win a DH world cup with a 36T

AND... you can also do well in a DH world cup race if you break a chain and simply freewheel down the course, with the steepness of them (Like Cedric Gracia has done). Totally different, like comparing apples with eggs. When do you ever see a 5 mile fire-road section in a DH world cup race course? Never.

mcc are you thick?
you fella have a fast cadence others however do not. simple really.

I was simply asking in my first post who else is switching back.

mcc are you thick?
you fella have a fast cadence others however do not. simple really.

I was simply asking in my first post who else is switching back.

5 mile fire road descents at Keilder? 😆

simply freewheel

I'm with GW on this triple chainsets make very little sense anymore and you can pretty much select a combination of 2 chainrings and a cassette to suit your fitness (or lack there of) or your need to push big gears should you have such a desire....

For my own part at present I find 22/36 with an 11-32 cassette, covers more than enough bases, others experiences may vary but they are not me...

ride what you like but triples are for mugs.... 😀

FFS great friendly thread again :):)

All depends where and what you do.

When I lived in the lakes I was not going to give up a 22t ring.
Very happy with 22+36 - 11-34/36
As for running 32x11-36 I used to spin out far too often in middle ring to make that an option.

I did do 1x9 with 36-11-34 for a year on a 34lb bike i did get stronger but really missed being able to spin.

42 rings on [b][i][u]MY[/u][/i][/b] bikes was the least used. Only wear was from rocks so made sense to get rid.

Now I live somewhere more rolling I can see myself going 1x9/10. But more likely to move somewhere less rolling as it's more fun.

Edit

5 mile fire road descents at Keilder?

simply freewheel
So clueless

Boys boys boys

There's a good thread in here somewhere.

I just did a 8 day mountain stage race on a 26er with triple. I was so exhausted some days I can't imagine hauling myself up those climbs without granny. My pal however did it on a 29er double and was fine. I'm now riding a 29er triple but have a lovely double middleburn staring at me from the shed. Anyone have a link to gear charts that compare 26 and 29er? If Northwind is right on the ratios I'm going double.

Btw the fast guys at Transpyr were all on 29er doubles but were mostly supermen.

I can't imagine hauling myself up those climbs without granny. My pal however did it on a 29er double and was fine.

Mike I'm sure you are making a valid point but honestly I don't have a clue what you are saying.

5 mile fire road descents at Keilder?

I never said descent 🙄 . There is 5 mile long fire-road sections though.

Mcboo, ah just forget it - you post reads like your mate was running a double without a small chainring - hence the perverse comment.

For some reason these 1byX or 2byX or 3byX threads bring out the worst in us!

I have to side with GW and Nikk on this. Based on my own experience, the problem with 2X9 systems is that they lose the wrong ring. Quite why anyone outside of the world cup DH circuit needs anything bigger than a 36t up front is beyond me (and I'm being generous as I don't think anything larger than a 32t is really needed for 99% of the time). For that reason 1x10 is great for me as it drops about a pound and gives me greater drive train security.

You can easily spin up to about 25mph on a 32t fron and 11t rear; granted for long road and fire road descents spinning at 30mph would be hard.

Thing is though, I regularly hit 27-29mph (haven't quite managed 30mph yet) on a 32t front 11t rear and this is over rough-ish ground like the peak. I tend not to worry too much about pedalling and instead focus on trying to keep smooth and carry speed.

That said, I know a few people who have started to go back to 2byX set ups from 1x10 because they do want the lower gear range and that's where the loss is most felt (unless you're riding a lot of road sections). Oddly, given that I am the least fit of our riding group, I'm still happy on 1x10. I managed 4000ft of climbing in the peak last Saturday on it, not at the quickest pace though. I think to be quick uphill for racing, you do need to be able to spin a bit more rather than just grind.

Ok, if you're all so tough and manly then why aren't you all spinning out the highest gear on downhills which happens to me??

Because our downhills are not grass slopes or fire-roads and often do not have sections where multiple seated pedal strokes make a difference or are an option that does not result in pain, and lots of it.

And is a lot slower for racing - you can't win in an event like Kielder 100 with less than a 42 up front I imagine.

You imagine wrong, as Ben Thomas managed just that! Kielder isn't representative of most racing anyway.

I'm with GW, but it's totally personal anyway! I've not used a 22t chainring for 7 years now, just didn't find it much use. I'm reasonably fit, and ride fairly light bikes, so it works for me. I really like the 36t single on my current bike. If I was building a trail bike I'd probably go for a 28/40 double, a 32t single would annoy me as I often ride 15 miles on the road to get to the trails, but I think a bigger single ring would probably have me struggling in places, and I'm not interested in walking up climbs.

I'd never go back to a triple though!

[url= http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=3521 ]try a little research...[/url]here & [url= http://www.bikecalc.com/gear_inches ]here.[/url] then come back and we can all talk like grown ups.

I've gone double as the lowest gear on my triple when I went 10 speed was 22 - 36 which is utterly ridiculous.

ride what you like / suits where you ride / suits your fitness

I went from 3x9 to 2x9 on my mtb, initially with 36/22 chainset, couldn't stand the bigger jump at the front so went to back to 32/22 & love it.

On my road bike I fitted a triple chainset which suits me & my riding very well & I see no advantage at all in either a double or compact setup.

I think it's easy to forget what a huge range of working cadences a cyclist can have. Doing some rough calculations my legs seem to manage 40rpm to 140rpm pretty happily - with 32t 11-36 that equates to 2.8mph to 33mph. If I regularly raced XC I might need more gears than 1x10 but then again, if I regularly raced XC my legs would be more used to hiding hard without breaks for longer periods so maybe 1x10 would work well for that. But longer format XC racing is the only time I've wanted more than 1x10 and I really like it the rest of the time.

i suspect that i should consider a switch to 1x10...

i've found that 26/32 at the front works well for me: i spend most of the time in the 32 ring, using the 26 in 'emergencies' (if i'm tired, if the hill is steep, or both).

Yes, i know there's a massive overlap, but as i've said above, i AM a pathetic weakling, and find a 32/34 just a bit too much when my pathetic scrawny legs are tired, or the hill is steep, or both.

but, 10speed cassettes are even bigger, it might just be enough for even me to manage...

[s](if it works, i could consider a kona honzo 🙂 )[/s]

...29er wheels change the gearing don't they, i'll need to do some maths...

As for climb size, Le Chable to Col de Gentiannes in the Val de Bagnes on a 2x9, in prep for the Grand Raid Cristalp. Is that a big enough climb?
Really depends on the gradient, I'm not familiar with that climb.

its only 2.1km vertical, with a bit of everything, tarmac, fireroad, glacial moraine and snow.

but anyway, i use a 26/40 and 11/34, why i never really used the granny ring anyway, and certainly not the smallest gears so made sense to me to use a slightly bigger inner ring, As for the big ring, unless your doing long road downhills you rarely need a 42/44 big ring. Would i go single? at the moment no, when i ride off road i have a fair amount of road sections and a 30something ring is IMO simply too small for that. But if i was building a pure race bike then i would drop the size of the big ring a bit to make it more versatile offroad.

I'm loving my 2x10 since switching. I'm not a racer or uberfit - I'm the best climber in our riding group though.

38/26 with 11-36 - means I can stay on the big ring 99% of the time but have a bailout for long steep climbs.

Shifting etc is excellent but I do find the 10 speed XT chain really noisy compared to my previous KMC X9L's (sounds like it's not set up properly and is rubbing even though it isn't)

I find on 2x10 I use the front mech a lot as the gears used most, the middly gears, are found at the edge of the small ring and big ring gear spread. this means many more changes require both shifters, and a initial double shift, followed by a corrective rear shift.

That is why the bikes I have built for myself (ie not demo bikes) are 1x10 or single speed.

1x10 is also lighter, cheaper, mechanically more reliable. And as a single speeder it's a bit of a luxury to have gears, other times it's a curse.

Once upon a time we'd laugh at the roadies for having this sort of argument over double vs compact vs triple.

but, 10speed cassettes are even bigger, it might just be enough for even me to manage...

(if it works, i could consider a kona honzo )

...29er wheels change the gearing don't they, i'll need to do some maths...

I survived Big Dog yesterday with 32t 11-36 with legs on the edge of cramp for half the race. I don't think I'd have coped with my old 32t 11-34 1x9 transmission. Riding 32t 11-36 on a 29er you have a fractionally higher bottom gear than with 32t 11-34 on a fat tyred (real 2.2 or typical 2.4) 26er and higher still if you run equal width tyres on 29 and 26.

Does anyone else work on spinning fast? I swear it's easier to get quicker at spinning than stronger at stomping!

I think some of the differences between folks on this thread boil down to whether they race or not. Many trail riders don't really understand the obsessive gear dilemmas xc racers have.

It's a long time since I raced xc and had 3x8, which suited me just fine. I couldn't tell you what the ratios were, nor did I care - they were what came in the bike. Having said that I was always a mid-pack sport rider at best.

I now just trail ride with the occasional DH race: on the trail bike I have 2x9 & on the DH bike I have 1x9.

I simply don't get why everyone jumped on the 10 speed bandwagon so enthusiastically. I'm now on 9 speed because that's what my bike/groupset came with - it wasn't a conscious choice, I just bought what was available. I went 2x9 because I like the clearance a double and bash gives me.

seemingly every other day someone is selling their 9 speed gear setup because they've discovered that 10 speed is n% better. It's just not. Your brain and legs will adapt to whatever work and compromise you're asking them to make by having 1 less gear. It's marketing balls, and if you do some soul searching then you'll agree.

'Gear ratios are variable'

seemingly every other day someone is selling their 9 speed gear setup because they've discovered that 10 speed is n% better. It's just not. Your brain and legs will adapt to whatever work and compromise you're asking them to make by having 1 less gear. It's marketing balls, and if you do some soul searching then you'll agree.

Whilst I do agree I certainly find the 11-36 cassette instrumental in my liking of 1x10. I'd not want the compromise at either end as 1x9 would require.