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

Aye, I'd agree with njee20 there. TBH if either of the big 2 made a quality 11-36 9 speed cassette, I'd be sticking with that but they decided to make it a 10-speed exclusive 🙁

Yep, agree with that. No specific desire to use 10 speed per se, it just offers the most versatile ratios.

Hi guys,

How about you ride / push up helvellyn / snowdon / cadair idris etc or a lot of the munros - say do it with a heavy pack or on day 3 of a 5 day hut to hut ride - i guess a lot of the 1x N brigade would secretly like a wee 22/ 20 T granny...

I am a fit climber and if i was just doing trail centres or racing i would use 1 x N I am sure - a double 22/32 mostly suits me fine with the 42 serving as a spiky bashguard...

a quick and i mean quick 23 year old i ride with has now got a double set up for when he rides with us... he just cannot push the 34 / 36 T single he uses....

up to the rider / terrain to dictate etc - gears are good !

Yes, it's personal, for the riding you do and your fitness level more than one ring is necessary. No need to get so defensive and comparisons to other riders of any age are pretty meaningless.

How do these threads drag on?!

too many people who know everything njee...

I've got....(whisper it).....
a triple on my road bike.

snowpaul - I wish you could still get 20T granny rings as I hate large cassette sprockets and the excess chain and increased chainslap in the smaller sprockets when descending that comes with running them.

20/36 & 11 -28 8speed cassette would be ideal for me, have no useable cross over gears, be as light as 10speed XT for 20% of the outlay but far more durable/reliable.

How about you ride / push up helvellyn / snowdon / cadair idris etc or a lot of the munros - say do it with a heavy pack or on day 3 of a 5 day hut to hut ride - i guess a lot of the 1x N brigade would secretly like a wee 22/ 20 T granny...
I am a fit climber and if i was just doing trail centres or racing i would use 1 x N I am sure - a double 22/32 mostly suits me fine with the 42 serving as a spiky bashguard...

Much as I'd like to go on big rides like that, I don't because I'm at the opposite end of the country and too short of time. I only race or ride trail centres a few times a year but I'm out twice a week on average. For the riding I do 1x10 works. For the riding you do, it doesn't. We are all individuals!

If you hardly use the 42t I'd get rid of it - when I broke my ankle my plastic bash gave me a pretty bad graze which healed slowly under the cast. I hate to think what the injury would have been like with chainring teeth involved... But it's a personal choice of benefit vs risk.

snowpaul - I wish you could still get 20T granny rings as I hate large cassette sprockets and the excess chain and increased chainslap in the smaller sprockets when descending that comes with running them.

5-arm cranks and you can. Middleburn must do some.

njee20 wrote:

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,

mrmo wrote:

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.

Just as a balance, I did a 75 mile road day on my MTB a couple of months ago between Kinlochewe and Ullapool. Wasn't racing, was carrying 20Kg of stuff. Wasn't the fastest 75 miles anyone has done, but the gears were not the thing holding me back. Tagged along with a roadie for a few miles as well, didn't feel under geared following them, even blasting down short hills...

AFAIAA 32x11 can get you to at least 25mph without crazy spinning. If you are doing more than that for longer than 5 minutes on a flat road on a MTB, maybe give Team GB a call 😉

snowpaul wrote:

How about you ride / push up helvellyn / snowdon / cadair idris etc or a lot of the munros - say do it with a heavy pack or on day 3 of a 5 day hut to hut ride - i guess a lot of the 1x N brigade would secretly like a wee 22/ 20 T granny...

If you can't do it in 32x36, chances are a couple smaller granny gears aren't going to make a big difference. I find carrying stuff up steep paths in the highlands, not only the gradient is hard, but also the surface is tricky. The added weight plus all day effort means you are far better and more efficient just walking it, rather than trying to crank and finesse a bike + kit over washed out, boggy, rocky, steep path. Daytrips / half day jaunts are a different thing.

Yeah, Njee, I know that would work but I love the stiffness of Saint cranks.
Could go Profile 3-pc with 5 bolt spider but IME they never run perfectly straight, aren't the best BB Design for muddy use and even with a Ti BB axle would be heavier.

Perhaps it would be easier to see the differences/similarities in ratios if we used a common accurate language to express these ratios?
After all 1x10 gives quite different final ratio spread to 3x9 depending on cassette/wheel selected.
I would gladly sit and post all the charts for you but I'm simply not that interested.

Fwiw: (yes I see the irony of this) 22/36:11-32 on a 26in wheel gives me the flexibility to ride everything so far, Trail, DH, Alps to local xc hacks (although I miss my 36:16 26in singlespeed since it was nicked)

AFAIAA 32x11 can get you to at least 25mph without crazy spinning. If you are doing more than that for longer than 5 minutes on a flat road on a MTB, maybe give Team GB a call

If you sit at >100rpm yes, you can. But a 36 means you've got something in reserve at a sensible pace. I want to get the road bits done as quickly as possible to get to the fun bits!

Do people still pedal downhill in the UK?

try a little research...here & here. then come back and we can all talk like grown ups.

Just did. The figure for the lowest gear in each is totally different, 16 compared to 19, comparing my old 26" 3x9 to my new 29" 2x10.

I heard also that when you go 29, you lose a gear. So a 34 at the back becomes more like a 32.

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.

Yep i agree with that.

nikk - Member
I find carrying stuff up steep paths in the highlands, not only the gradient is hard, but also the surface is tricky. The added weight plus all day effort means you are far better and more efficient just walking it, rather than trying to crank and finesse a bike + kit over washed out, boggy, rocky, steep path.

Having ridden 44/32/22 11-32; 36/22 11-32; 36/22 11-34; 32/22 11-34; 32t 11-34; and 32t 11-36 in the last couple of years, I can extrapolate that 34t 11-42 (1x11) would be great! Just that bit more on the top and the bottom. And in an ideal world you'd be able to easily swap the front chainring, smaller for epic rides, long races or winter mud, bigger for shorter rides/races.

I heard also that when you go 29, you lose a gear.

It makes the gearing slightly taller, you don't lose a gear as such!

I can extrapolate that 34t 11-42 (1x11) would be great!

Oh well, Mr SRAM agrees with you!

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

Oops, didn't realize that.

Certainly as far as the SRAM stuff is concerned you have a good choice of fronts as far as the produced ranges go; and you can put pretty much any 10 speed cassette you want out back.

The 'long' RD's will cover an 11-36 quite happily.

TBH; with 28/42 and 11-36 to play with, you're so close to having the range of a standard triple on 11-32 it's hardley worth getting the calculator out, carrying less metal and you've done away with the fudgery that is the middle ring shift on a triple. You've also improved your Q factor as you've actually got a genuine double crankset instead of taking your big ring off and sticking a bash on it, thereby missing out on the pedal spacing advantage.

I'm not sure I'd chuck a decent 3x9 or 2x9 away for 2x10; although it's a very tempting option if you'rebuilding or needed to renew anyway...

It was getting rid of the triple front shift and narrower pedal spacing that sid it for me.

I guess like everything else about bike set-up; it's personal.

There's lots of kit out there and no reason you need to use the same as everyone else!

Having been riding round the highlands towing a trailer full of two folks camping kit I certainly have a need for a 22 granny ring - I spent an hour or so in that on one climb alone.

22 / 34 granny is slightly quicker adn easier than walking for me. 36 / 11 top gear gives me 25+ mph - fast enough for me to pedal to offroad.

I like to ride up hills and am happy to freewheel when i spin out

I remember racing in the Pentlands in the 90's with a 22/34/48 setup and people were laughing at me before the race. The 22 was seen as a bairn's gear. This bairn's gear saw me ride past folk walking up the grassy slopes later in the race. Loved the 22t.

I have been using 1x9 11-32x33t for a while and recently went to 1x10 with a 11-36x32t and find myself spinning out easily on the flats with the 32t. I am crap at spinning but regardless of that problem.. I would benefit on rides with other folk pushing 42/32 10spd setup's if I had a 34t on it. However,I am not strong these days so I choose to go for the 32t up front with the 11-36t to help me elsewhere on the rides around here. The shifting on one side only with no extra rings/front mech etc sways me towards this combo more than the 3x9 or 3x10 route regardless of sorting out the problem of keeping up on the flat tracks/faster descents. It's not an issue if I'm not racing.

1x9 with 33t x 11-34t felt a good all rounder too but everyone's different so it's pretty meaningless to go spouting what is right or wrong unless we know power outputs etc. Having said all that,I do like the 3x10 on the 140mm travel bike. Jumping between 32 and 42 while roughly in the middle of the cassette is really nice.

Would never go back to 22/32/44. Not strong enough.

Do people still pedal downhill in the UK?

yep. that's why I have a 46x11 as a top gear.

I pedal uphill too, hence the 22x34.

I don't ride with folk using 1x10 or 2x10 as I get bored waiting for them.

The two 2x systems I've had personal dealings with shifted like crap on the front. One was an improv 9 spd system, the other a purpose built SRAM 10 spd set up. Both owners were happy but I would not have been.

yep. that's why I have a 46x11 as a top gear.

I don't ride with folk using 1x10 or 2x10 as I get bored waiting for them

🙄

Unless you are Nino Schurter you've just not found the right people. More to speed than gear ratios!

1/9 with a 32 chainring and a 11/34 cassette works well on my HT. it would not work on my FS because it climbs brilliantly seated but not that we'll standing. So I have 2/9 on that.

Dunno where you get your figures from TJ but 35mph+ is perfectly achievable with 36x11

reakon GW? On 26 inch wheels? - thats one heck of a cadence and well faster than I can spin I top out around 30 mph on 36 / 11 . In that case what speed is that chap above pedalling on his 44 / 11 top gear he needs?

we're not talking about spinning on the flat tho

36 x 11 @ 120RPM = 30.4mph

120RPM is pretty god damn fast pedal turnover speed. Not sustainable in my book except for short sprints.

I can hit 30+ mph on the MTB down hill on a top gear of 36 / 11 but have been told on here repentantly that that is impossible so put 25 to avoid arguments. FAIL! 🙂

138 cadence easily achievable....AWESOME

Aye and 120rpm isn't even that fast, BMX racers pedal their bikes to 35 on the flat hitting 170rpm.

What's your highest cadence Al?

I shall do some cadence testing on my commute...

dunno Gary, I am a spinner tho, and ride ss now and again, so I doubt it would be slow. Never had a meter for it. TBF 120-140 wouldn't be a problem.

No need Chief

138 cadence easily achievable....AWESOME

pedalling at 120 rpm gives over 35mph with a 26x2.4" tyre

On various bikes I have, 1x9, 2x9, 2x8 and s/s and what [b]really[/b] pisses me off is when I want to change set-up I can never find the right size/length chain in the spares box 😐

I'm not a pedaller at all, generally just use short bursts of sprinting to get upto speed and use the terrain and gradient to gain speed, I don't really even use my 11T sprocket off road and can still hit 35 on a descent.

You don't need a meter to measure cadence, there's this thing called 'counting'... 😉

Done that, it's how I know I'm a spinner. Never tested my max tho.

EDIT and GW my arithmetic was based on the 120rpm calc above. Can you show your workings please?

You do need a meter to measure max tho, I don't ever pedal for a full minute un-interupted unless I'm climbing, and there's no way I could sustain my absolute max for more than a few seconds.

Well there's also these other things called speedometers and arithmetic! 😉

I thought about this a bit last night when out riding: everyone is focussed on the extremes of what each Gearing setup can achieve but without any actual measured comparison of the gearing its meaningless, tossing about cadence figures means even less without context, so I worked up some quick and dirty tables:

[img] [/img]

They are roughly based on some of chainring/cassette sizes people have mentioned already, taking top and bottom sprocket sizes, from 'Standard' cassettes. I've also included the extremes of XX1 will offer, and struck through combinations which I believe users are unlikely to consider (but the value is still there if you are interested)...

one thing that lept out at me was the combination of a 24T Granny with a 36T sprocket (Dynasis 3x10 standard) Vs 22T Granny with a 32T sprocket (Arguably 3/2x9 Standard)... They're as near as damn it the same ratio, so it seems Shimano don't really think you need much easier gears even on 10 speed...

The top ring on a 'standard' triple or a GRRRR XC racers Double is 42T which is why I didn't bother going any higher; a ratio of 3.8 (producing 99 gear inches for 26" or 110 for 29") I've included 32/34/36/38 chainrings as these are all popular choices on both double, some triple and various single chainring setups...

Based on this I can tell that my own 22/36 x 11-32 gives me an overall range from 17.9 - 85.1 gear inches (26" Wheels). 1x10 would not allow me to reproduce this range, 2x10 could, infact it could be configured to give me slightly more top or bottom range if I really wanted...

For my own needs I tend to treat 2x9 more like [I]"1x9(+4)"[/I] in that I spend 95% of my time in the 36t; in that ring I can ride flat and DH trails, Climb a fair bit offroad and chug along at a comfortable enough pace on the road... I've tried a 32T and that doesn't quite supply the slightly higher range of gears I needed some of the time, by the same token a 42T massively over-guns it for me 99.5% of the time and would mean I spent more time futher up the cassette and/or switching between chainrings giving an extra 5 gear inches I don't think I would regularly use... The 22T granny ring gives me the +3 or 4 'bailout gears' (once you account for overlap) to spin my way up longer climbs or allow me to winch up steeper offroad stuff, that is all it really provides and I'm happy with that

of course range is only half the point, sensible, usable increments are more important than just producing a huge range of ratios IMO i.e. 24/38 + 11-36 would provide me a harder top gear and about the same bottom gear for climbing but I think I'd be using the granny slightly more often and might not make much use of that 38/11 ratio,
These are the sort of tradeoffs to consider...

XX1 is interesting; the range you get is of course very broad for 1Xn and that 10T sprocket makes a significant impact 32-10 gives you a gear not far short of 36-11, and a climbing gear close to 24-32 so could well suit slightly stronger riders and XC racers, it might not quite manage to deliver the range that many 2x9/10 riders want and certainly won't cover what a 3x10 rider gets at present, but that is as you would expect, If you already use 1x10 with 32T Chain ring and 11-36 Cassette then XX1 should extend top and bottom gearing by an apprecable amount...

could well suit slightly stronger riders and XC racers

Not many XC racers still running a 24-32 bottom gear, so XX1 will offer something lower. I think it's a bit of a shame they're not doing something slightly closer, 10-36 or 11-40 or sommat. I think the gaps will be really pronounced on the 10-42 block.

I didn't realise that XXI is 10-42 on the back - that's great! The biggest step in the gears is between the two smallest sprockets and that's only 20% so like changing your cadence from 100rpm to 83rpm. 420% gear range vs 327% for 11-36 1x10 or 505% for 36/22 11-34 2x10.

How do you know what the gaps are?

Either way, I notice the gaps on an 11-36 at times (although admittedly more on the road), and they're gonna be significantly wider on an 11-42, one extra gear would be nice, but I don't really feel the need for that much range.

Basically it's a way of getting folk who run a double onto a single, rather than catering for those who already run a single.

Surely the gaps on a 10-42 11sp are going to be almost identical to the gaps on a 11-36 10sp, since the main thing is it's gained an extra cog rather than rejigged it all to fit?

Either way... choose the ratios you want or tend to use.
2x10 and 3x9 give virtually identical range (just losing the equivalent of 44x11 for me, which I can live with). 1x10 doesn't replicate the ratios I want/need, so the arguments about simpler mechanicals are irrelevant.

njee20 - Member
How do you know what the gaps are?

You can usually roughly work it out based on logic with the aim being to keep the percentage jumps between gears approx the same across the range so you start off with 1 tooth jumps then increase to 2,3,4,etc as the sprockets get bigger.

Sprocket 10 12 14 16 18 21 24 28 32 36 42
% change 20.0 16.7 14.3 12.5 16.7 14.3 16.7 14.3 12.5 16.7

So that sequence equates to a typical approx 15% jump per gear

How do you know what the gaps are?

Google! The SRAM XXI brochure says it's:

10-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36-42

Posh PG1080/XX vs XX1

11-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36
10-12-14-16-18-21-24-28-32-36-42

looks almost identical to me (although other SRAM cassettes differ slightly), so identical % difference apart from at the 2 ends.

Obv. the chainring may differ too, depending on preference.
How long before we get 12sp cassettes?

@ chiefgrooveguru - Do people really ride to Cadence like that on an MTB?

Cadence means very little on it's own, I mean are you expecting to constantly chop out 100+ RPM on a smooth or draggy surface? Climbing, on the flat or descending?

I was under the general impression that the 'Average' cyclist is most comfortable at about 70RPM (+/-10ish) for sustained periods of pedaling (Up, Down or along) and that you use the gears to make the work level comfortable, The only real exception being Lance who was on a road bike and Juiced to the eyeballs so doesn't count...

In much the same way you don't drive your car everywhere at 8000 RPM, you use the appropriate gearing to suit the work you are expecting the engine to do and keep the RPMs and energy use in a sensible range...

You are the engine on a bike, and reving the Nuts off your engine is far from ideal...

As for the Gaps on any given cassette My understanding was that you can't really have a step of more than 4 teeth between any two sprockets (that's the biggest gap I can recall seeing on any cassette) to in theory you could manage 10-42 in just 9 sprockets but the leaps would be so huge that you'd seldom be in anything like the gear you wanted, I think XX1 is probably profiled a bit like a sensible 8 speed range (say 11-28) with 2 big rings (almost equivalent to 2Xn bailout gears with a granny) on the top and one tiddler on the bottom to broaden it further...

As a 2Xn rider I can see the appeal of XX1 and if I were a shade fitter and alot richer I'd seriously consider buying it...

Edit:

that 36-42 is a 6T jump, that will feel big on the trail, definately more of a bailout geat than the next ratio in a nominal sequence...

Surely the gaps on a 10-42 11sp are going to be almost identical to the gaps on a 11-36 10sp, since the main thing is it's gained an extra cog rather than rejigged it all to fit?

It's not though is it, there's one extra cog, and they've added a sprocket in the bottom and 1.5 up top, ergo bigger gaps.

Either way... choose the ratios you want or tend to use.

They don't do 'em, that's what I'm saying! If XX1 came in something slightly narrower I'd possibly be getting quite excited, probably 11-40 so I didn't need a new freehub body, but they don't!

looks almost identical to me (although other SRAM cassettes differ slightly), so identical % difference apart from at the 2 ends.

Interesting, I'd assumed it would go 11-12-14 etc, that will mean a big jump to the 10, meaning it's a bit less usable, a proper downhill gear!

You shouldn't think of the jumps in teeth count, it's the ratio difference that matters. 36-42 is only a 1/6 increase, little worse than 28-32 which is 1/7.

I'm not an XC racer, I'm just aware that there's a huge cadence range possible, and going from 3x9 down to 1x9 (now 1x10) has taught me that I can stomp stronger and spin faster than I thought I could, and now riding BMX is showing me there's yet more potential. To be honest when MTBing I tend to pump and carry speed without braking as much as possible, so I'm not mad keen on pedalling...

This thread seemed to start out as the epitome of the "i ride this if you don't it's coz you're shit" threads that seem to crop up a lot. Ride what works for you. Glad to see it's calmed down.

Is switching to single chainring and cramming in as big a cassette as possible into the back wheel really the future? What happened to gear hub/boxes and stuff?

that 36-42 is a 6T jump, that will feel big on the trail, definately more of a bailout geat than the next ratio in a nominal sequence...

No it's not - check out my percentage jumps - it's actually a perfectly normal step.

Is switching to single chainring and cramming in as big a cassette as possible into the back wheel really the future?

If they work as well as current rear mechs/cassettes then I'd be very happy for exactly that - full range with no need for front mechs which are a really bodgy solution even compared to rear mechs. YMMV.

What happened to gear hub/boxes and stuff?

Nothing of benefit to the typical rider yet. One day maybe but mechs are proving hard to improve on for what most people seem to want.

One day maybe but mechs are proving hard to improve on for what most people seem to want.

*yes yes ok it's actually pretty damn good but it's still dragging the chain across a block and is still open to getting gunked up by mud and ripped off by passing rocks.

Remberthat a lot of folk are having to fit some sort of chain device when losing the front mech. That seems to take away some of the perceived advantages.

Im not reading past the first page here so forgive me if it has been said already but all of you guys who ride 1 x 10 and feel that is all you will ever need then good on ya but i seriously doubt you would handle a full day riding some big routes in Scotland day in day out. Im a 2 x 9 convert and nobody i ride with (and there are some strong lads in the group) even consider a 1 x 10 set up.

Madness i tells ya.

You shouldn't think of the jumps in teeth count, it's the ratio difference that matters. 36-42 is only a 1/6 increase, little worse than 28-32 which is 1/7.

Aimed at me? It wasn't that end of the block I was thinking of, never really notice gaps there as one tends to be grinding away and not looking for a subtle change.

I only notice it at the other end - caning down a fireroad chasing someone down, go for a bigger gear and... shit, that's a hell of a jump, back we go. The 10t being a step change will make it extremely noticeable, but in some ways I guess that's better than sacrificing more usable gaps in the middle of the block.

forgive me if it has been said already but all of you guys who ride 1 x 10 and feel that is all you will ever need then good on ya but i seriously doubt you would handle a full day riding some big routes in Scotland day in day out

Yes, it has been said, fortunately the thread got away from that narrow minded pseudo willy waving, well done for bringing it back there!

D0NK - Member
yeah but instead of ploughing R&D into polishing the efficient cheap light turd* we have now, how about spending that R&D cash on a more elegant system.

*yes yes ok it's actually pretty damn good but it's still dragging the chain across a block and is still open to getting gunked up by mud and ripped off by passing rocks.

I agree BUT lots of people have been trying that and just can't seem to achieve it with a real world practical/not silly expensive solution. Plus IME, mud actually isn't a problem the vast majority of the time and I've trashed a grand total of two mech and two hangers in the 20 years I've been mtbing - hardly something that I can't live with and seems to be reasonably similar for others who ride similar trails/etc to me.

Based on my experience, cyclists want light kit that's fairly durable and works well. So far other solutions have improved durability, some work well (or acceptably well) but none are as light for the same functionality or cost. It just may be that for what we want, what we have is already the best solution.

^^^^ This

I've yet to be convinced that a solution better than dérailleurs exists, they work fine 99.9% of the time, and I don't want the drawbacks of other systems just for that 0.1%.

Is switching to single chainring and cramming in as big a cassette as possible into the back wheel really the future? What happened to gear hub/boxes and stuff?

Very good point!

What I still can't quite figure is why SRAM have never really pushed their 'Dual Drive' Epicyclic, Cassette hubs towards MTBists...

A 2 or 3 speed epicyclic hub combined with an 8/9/10 speed cassette pisses all over the rest in terms of total gearing range and backwards compatibility, makes hammerschmidt look like a pretty pointless excercise, and means you can keep your existing rear mech/cassette setup and ditch a front mech, for a marginally heavier rear hub, it's been in their range for donkeys years, since acquiring Sachs, they've just never promoted or developed it much... SA have something similar also I believe...

SRAM have just sat on the technology/concept and done relatively speaking bugger all with it...

As for Gearboxes, I think the primary problem comes there with the Massive shift in and impact to the market if you were to introduce such a product Vs the general benefits to the existing Big suppliers of drivetrain parts to the world (SRAM/SHimano/Campag/Suntour...)

The only organisations with the budgets and technical/manufacturing capabilities to bring something like that to market would perhaps not benefit from it as much as they do the status quo...

Shimano/SRAM make some money when you buy a bike with their OEM kit fitted, they then more than likely make some money from you every ~6 months when you Replace/Upgrade parts, current drivetrains ensure a relatively steady revenue stream...

Introduce the wet dream product a sealed unit gearbox that only requires an oil change every 6 months and keeps going and you've knackered their current business model which has regular turnover and every product comes with built in obselecence...

Having said that I do think the good old Derailleur has done us pretty well up to now, and is actually a relatively efficent, moderately robust design considering the exposure to the elements/abuse it gets...

I agree BUT lots of people have been trying that

and I don't want the drawbacks of other systems just for that 0.1%

looks like it's going to be a long time coming tho.

I've gone 2x10 since moving up to a Rumblefish 29er this year and don't miss the third ring at the front. Mine is 26/38 front and 11-36 rear, covers everywhere, haven't run out of gears once and there's nowhere flat here in the IOM. Can't say I miss that ''oo er, that's a bit spinny" sensation of 22-32 with my chain flapping about like an empty washing line either. Won't be going back to 3x10

rohloff and a low end shimano hub? I might have missed one or two others but "lots"?

Lots of people have tried, few have made it to market (the two you mention being the main ones), arguably even fewer (none!) are as good based on what most people want.

im surprised at you mick for bothering with 2x10 bollix and for asking on here

Yes, it has been said, fortunately the thread got away from that narrow minded pseudo willy waving, well done for bringing it back there!

Ha ha that will be me told then. 😀

are you the same mactheknife from mad and epic forums ??

Na bud, no idea about those forums. Sounds ominous. 😀

I shall do some cadence testing on my commute...

Spinning at 34mph on my way home from a mini DH session today. With 32:11 top gear and 27" wheels that's 145rpm at the cranks.

I was consciously thinking about it yesterday, I found about 24mph (with 36/11 and 26" wheels) became the difference between 'actually feeling like I'm pushing on here' and 'starting to spin pretty quickly'. Can certainly go much quicker, but I'd not want to sit at that speed for a prolonged time!

I've yet to be convinced that a solution better than dérailleurs exists, they work fine 99.9% of the time, and I don't want the drawbacks of other systems just for that 0.1%.

Front however! Nightmare of a system. Clunky and frequently hassle and same across various brands and models I've used. I get it all set up smooth as possible in the stand and give it a few rides and something's rubbing on the mech cage somewhere. Make adjustments and it's rubbing in another gear and can go on for ages fiddling like that. Then changing gear up to the bigger rings and something's not quite right and it clunks along for ages trying to shift up. Adjust again, works for a while then gone again. Then drops to lower rings when you don't want it, and so on!

I never have this much hassle with the rear, only the front.

Though have to say the 2x10 has been worst. On the rubbing side of it I think it's because the front mech cage is narrower and there's little room to clear the chain when in big-to-big, small-to-small combos and the next nearest gears. But even in middle gears, bounce over rocks and roots and there's a little sideways movement of the chain and clattering against the cage. Chain drop is even more of a pain with 2x10 and tension seems to be the issue. Slightly worn chain, it's slack enough to not hold on. Even with an X-Guide in place which is Truvativ's 2x10 guide.

1x10 however on my other bike - perfect 🙂 . And the gear range for me is pretty much bang on what I really used out of the 2x9 I had before it. It's not about "look at me cope with less gears!" willy waving. It's about being much happier with far less hassles, having a silent bike, and at the same time being surprised it's not that much different in effort anyway.

In my mind 2x10 replicates most of what you want from 3x9. 1x10 is a compromise of 2x10 but if you don't need all of 2x10 then it can be fine. 1x11 will replicate 2x10 and that's what I'm looking forward to if they can make it robust enough for general use.

(sorry, repeating my rant from BR here 😀 )

So all that said, on the original question, no I wouldn't go back to 3x9/10, rather go single up front for less hassles than add more rings and still deal with front mech hassles.

Must say I never really had any problems with front mechs, running road or MTB ones, double or triple 9 or 10 speed! Don't miss having one though.

Would love to be able to deal with a single front ring and big block on the back, but fear I am simply not fit enough. I run a double and bash on front (22, 36) and 11-34 rear. Don't miss the big ring, if I spin out I am already going fast enough. But a 30ish single on the front..?

I reckon you'd definitely lose too much top end with that. There was a company advertising here (who were arseholes apparently) who did a 28 or 30t single though, Widgit or sommat?

TBH; with 28/42 and 11-36 to play with, you're so close to having the range of a standard triple on 11-32 it's hardley worth getting the calculator out,

I'm sure you're right, so why change? A triple gives you smaller jumps between ratios, and you still need a front mech and shifter for a double. It's a tiny weight saving and you still need to set a front mech up.

I can certainly see the advantages of a 1x10 system, as the simplicity and weight reduction can be balanced against reduced range and increased jumps between gears. Though I do get fed up waiting for the owners of such systems to put their chains back on...

It's about the ratios you like though, not so much the absolute limits. I found a 44t a bit big, a 32t a bit small, and a 22t no real use at all, so found 28/40 really good! YMMV