1×11 and 2×10 guff

So I’m interested – I’ve had my bike for several years, 3×9 SRAM X0 with XT front mech and XTR cranks – I use the full range of gears, can count on one hand how many times the chain has come off and even then it’s back on without stopping riding. Front mech is faultless, bike is light – just can’t see why everyone is evangelising over new more expensive set ups with less gear range and rear mechs with massive long cages that will hang lower and be more prone to damage. Discuss.

If they don’t work for you and where/how you ride then don’t have them and stick with what you’ve got?

Not sure there’s much to discuss.

2/10, must try harder

I had 3×9 years ago I can count on 1 hand the number of times I used the stupid big chain ring, the chain bounced all over the place and swapping between the front chain rings needed big jumps in cadence or speed..

I went 2x and it solved most of the jumping issues by adding a chain device and a clutch mech has recently helped. With 24/39 I get most of the gears that 3x has without needing a stupidly big ring to grind out on rocks the new one is behind a bash guard. But still the front chain ring jumps are huge

I’m going 1×10 (with a 40t) and then 1×11 when I can afford it. Now imagine having 18 of the 20 gears you had 2×10 on a setup with 1 mech so as you get halfway up the hill you don’t need to do a massive shift to get the lower gears from the granny ring. The chain stays on and it’s a big chunk lighter.

1×11 is very different to 1×10 in terms of range.

So I’m interested – I’ve had my bike for several years, 3×9 SRAM X0 with XT front mech and XTR cranks – I use the full range of gears, can count on one hand how many times the chain has come off and even then it’s back on without stopping riding. Front mech is faultless, bike is light – just can’t see why everyone is evangelising over new more expensive set ups with less gear range and rear mechs with massive long cages that will hang lower and be more prone to damage. Discuss.

If you change it then you’d be a fashion following fool. But plenty of riders would be getting annoying chain drop with your transmission otherwise there wouldn’t have been so many willing to tolerate the set up hassle, noise and drag of chain guides.

Also, I don’t understand why you think the mechs on 1×11, 2×10 and 1×10 systems are bigger and more prone to damage than your 3×9 mech? They’re not, they’re shorter, some of them much shorter.

just can’t see why everyone is evangelising over new more expensive set ups with less gear range and rear mechs with massive long cages that will hang lower and be more prone to damage. Discuss.

1 x 10:

Go on, have a go at running a triple ring setup up front with a mech that short and report back how you get on.

Possibly only one poster talking “guff”…

3×10 for me with a 32/11 cassette. I don’t constantly move between the front rings looking for marginal changes in gearing, but sort of have three 1×10’s to choose from. My legs don’t like big jumps between gears, so I have blocks of closley spaced gears to choose from. Whever climbing, descending, just spinning or on the road.
Again never had much of a problem with chains coming of or the front mech. Choice is good though so whatever works for you.

just can’t see why everyone is evangelising over new more expensive set ups with less gear range and rear mechs with massive long cages that will hang lower and be more prone to damage

🙄 Fail.

Mech length depends on total tooth capacity, front+back, so 1x setups generally allow a shorter cage to be used. Personally I’m happy enough with my 2×10 setup. Basically I treat it as a 10 speed with one get-out-of-jail gear (the granny), But if/when I start dropping chains on a regular basis or the price comes down I dare say I’ll go 1×11. With a 42T sprocket that last gear jump is not so far from what I get by dropping from 32 to 24 on the front anyway, so it’s still pretty much 10 speed plus a bail-out gear.

Front mech is faultless, bike is light – just can’t see why everyone is evangelising over new more expensive set ups with less gear range and rear mechs with massive long cages that will hang lower and be more prone to damage. Discuss.

– Bike would be lighter with 1×10.
– Like for like 1×11 set ups are cheaper than double (ie XX1 is cheaper than XX, and XO1 cheaper than XO)
– less range: well that’s about what you need, you’re using the full range on a triple, so it’s not for you. I’ve not used a triple for 9 years now, and I’d never go back
– we’ve covered the mech stuff

It all seems fairly simple now, if you can’t see a benefit you wont see one. It’s pointless trying to convince people otherwise.

I wonder how many will be running a £100 deore version in 5 or 6 years time.

I use the full range of gears, can count on one hand how many times the chain has come off

well done 3×9 works for you so 2x? or 1x? probably isn’t for you. I like tuebeless coz I used to flat a lot, my mate hardly ever flats so he has no interest in it and I don’t try to convince him.

<Edit> then again uppy downy seatposts provoked a lot of “I never drop my saddle” comments, which for some will still hold true, but how many “wow I’m a convert” threads do we get?

Like for like 1×11 set ups are cheaper than double

if 1x? become the norm I foresee the prices going up so it’s pretty much the same, possibly whacking the price of superwide range cassettes right up (coz there’s so much more material and machining honest!)

I was going to say this was a pretty bad troll, but I’m really strongly drawn to comment on it, so actually it must be pretty good- well done.

I wonder how many will be running a £100 deore version in 5 or 6 years time.

The answer to this is probably pretty much everyone!

I think the only reason we aren’t seeing these setups on many new complete bikes is that the groupset manufacturers would rather sell traditional multi-chainring setups, as they have more components and hence they are selling more stuff. So they are keeping the price of 1×10 setups artificially high at the moment, but this can’t/won’t last forever.

I’m not of the opinion that the OP is trolling. Its a fair question from someone who uses 3x and yet is seeing and reading evangelistic threads, articles etc on the boundless merits of 1x and 2x.

In much the exact same way some evangelise about tubeless, 29r, 650b, riser bars, tyres, brakes, yadda yadda yadda.

Whether its all marketing induced, or whether its just like when someone asks for a bike recommendation, many people will recommend what they have.

The interesting bit is the why! (EDIT – the need for the evangelism)

I agree OP, a lot of marketing bollocks hence a post I made the other day…

Read an alternative reality story:

Once upon a time, Mountain bikes appeared. They started out with 7 gears. There were big gaps between ratios, and huge chunky chains akin to single speed chains. The evil bike manufactures grimaced as their customers winced and scowled and struggled to get up the shortest of climbs, and adjust to the shallowest of descents.

After some time, everyone got fed up with this and, to avoid a revolt in the kingdom, Shimano and Sram reacted by making 8 speed drive trains. All of the riders in the kingdom celebrated – they could not believe that they had been struggling along with only 7 gears for such a long time!

5 years later, the bike companies introduced 9 speed. “The chains are too thin!” people cried. Gear ratio gaps were improving, but people were scared; fat business men worried, “Won’t my thighs of steel break these delicate little thin chains and sprockets?”. Pretty soon however, everyone adjusted and loved the new options of the ‘just the right gear’ feel.

Very soon, 10 speed arrived… followed shortly by 11. By now, cassettes had grown to the size of huge dinner plates and chains had got so thin that people were snapping chains just wafting near them with a pressure washer!

The pinnacle of thin chains had reached its maximum.

Then, one day, some clever bod at SRAM added another chainring and a shifter on the other side of the handlebar…

…Astounding! Shimano’s engineers had to follow suit.

In order to make this work, they had gone back to 8 speed so they could be sure this new front mech wouldn’t snap the chain when shifting.

The technology was a revolution and again, everyone in the kingdom was amazed. The gear ratios were closer and had a wider overall span. People could spin up the steepest of slopes, yet still had a selection of drive gears whilst descending at speed. Cyclists everywhere rejoiced at this incredible feat of engineering.

Over time, this second chain ring became a system of three rings at the front and the engineers discovered that even 10 speed chains could cope with this. People were riding with 30 gears! An almost infinite span of usable gears that had tiny increments in between, allowing the rider to fine tune what their cadence was and gave them immense capabilities of riding up and down – wherever and however their hearts desired.

Mountain bikers were thrilled! At last they could now truly ride up and over and down the other side.

There was even a weight advantage. The lack of dinner-plate-sized cassettes meant there was less radial weight to spin up on the rear wheel, people accelerated like rockets and with less unsprung mass the rear suspension was even more active.

People were incredulous. “How did we ever live with our 11 speed drive systems? How Archaic!” They exclaimed.

With 30 gears, and so much flexibility, the cyclists in the kingdom loved their mountain bikes, and they all lived happily ever after…. or at least until…

The following year some of the companies got together and introduced a new 26″ smaller wheel size to improve acceleration and handling. “29 inch is over” screamed all the magazines. The forums were rioting with hardcore 29er riders worrying sick that this new wheel standard would make their bikes difficult to buy spares for, thus potentially rendering them obsolete in what was perceived as foreseeable in as little as three months

Postscript: Oh how marketing has made fools of us!

slackalice – Member

I’m not of the opinion that the OP is trolling. Its a fair question from someone who uses 3x and yet is seeing and reading evangelistic threads, articles etc on the boundless merits of 1x and 2x.

The question’s fair- the way it’s asked is what shows it up as trolling, but the comments about more expense and “massive long cages” and that.

Or, alternatively I suppose he might have formed some wrong opinions based on an understanding of the facts which is absolutely back to front, and now he’s come on here to tell us all off based on that.

It’s not just about range, weight etc – a typical 32/34 chainring also results in much better ground clearance to help prevent grounding out and wrecking the chainring.

And while a chain might well stay on fine on a 3x system on UK style XC/trail riding, I’m not entirely confident it would do the same on a serious EWS/SuperEnduro/Mega style course at speed. It’s important to remember that product advancements are designed with the top riders in mind to assist them in maximising speed and results, so while you may not drop your chain on your ride, I’d bet someone like Jerome Clementz would be pretty likely to at the ridiculous speeds he is doing.

For everyone else, it’s just a nice thing to have that makes more difference for some than others.

Nothing wrong with that.

very good chilled. Of course it has some glaring errors which is why it’s not very credible really but made me smile nonetheless 😉

Well, without going too far down the conjecture route.

OP! Are you there?! What’s your perception of what is required in order to make a 1x or 2x work?

IME a 3x set up with a 12t – 36t cassette requires a long cage mech too (although I may be wrong!)

I’m not entirely confident it would do the same on a serious EWS/SuperEnduro/Mega style course at speed

Didn’t think fast courses and proriders had so much clearance trouble, thought it was talentless monkeys like me grounding their 44T rings on slow speed rock step ups and steep roll ins – that’s why I ditched big rings. Still got a few in the cupboard almost zero chain wear but serious tooth damage all at the same spot.

I’ve obviously been fed wrong info about cage length by a mate who said he thought about it but ground clearance was bad with the newer 10 or 11 speed mechs – I stand corrected. Can see the advantage of not having a big ring up front too so I’m sort of convinced (not that I will be changing).
I wasn’t so much saying it doesn’t work, just found it interesting that the marketing of these newer systems (and wheel sizes) seems to work so well that within no time at all everyone is making out that the ‘old’ systems are uncool and shite. Also strange macho approach that seems to say ‘I’m running a 1X11 system so am therefore rad to the max.

There will always be people willing to try new kit and people have been running 1 x for a long time, it’s just now more kit is available via normal retailers so more people are trying it.

Not sure I’ve seen much marketing surrounding 1 up front setups to be honest apart from people on here posting about it.

I’ll be going 1 x 10 on my hardtail build as I hate front mechs and don’t need a granny ring for 95% of my riding. I’ve not done it in the past as the noise from a chain guide annoyed me when riding but a narrow wide ring and clutch mech should give me enough reliability.

1x gearing is one of the developments that appears to have been driven by riders, shimano don’t even make 1x for trail riders (zee was aimed at budget DH), there’s not that much ‘marketing’ going on.

One of the beauties of 1x is no more frantic upshifting of the rear mech after you switch chainring in order to get a gear that’s similar in cadence to the one you just shifted out of. Each gear change is gradual, and if you suddenly need a handful of gears just shove the shifter further or do a rapid 3/4x click, which is almost always sufficient

Ahhh, that is where you are wrong IMO, not many people are saying that the old systems are shite. Just that as technology “advances” it will suit some people while others are more than happy to stick with the tried and tested older kit.

Take my ride yesterday as a small example, i am running X01 and i love it, one of my mates is 2 x 10 and he also loves it, and the fastest out of the 3 of us is on a 6 year old bike with a 3 x 9 set up that he keeps in shape with a large rock 🙂 and strangely enough he loves it!

None of us look at each others kit and feels that the newer gear is much better, just that whatever suits our wallets and our egos 🙂

chilled76 – Member
I agree OP, a lot of marketing bollocks hence a post I made the other day…

Read an alternative reality story:

Once upon a time, Mountain bikes appeared. They started out with 7 gears. There were big gaps between ratios, and huge chunky chains akin to single speed chains. The evil bike manufactures grimaced as their customers winced and scowled and struggled to get up the shortest of climbs, and adjust to the shallowest of descents.

After some time, everyone got fed up with this and, to avoid a revolt in the kingdom, Shimano and Sram reacted by making 8 speed drive trains. All of the riders in the kingdom celebrated – they could not believe that they had been struggling along with only 7 gears for such a long time!

5 years later, the bike companies introduced 9 speed. “The chains are too thin!” people cried. Gear ratio gaps were improving, but people were scared; fat business men worried, “Won’t my thighs of steel break these delicate little thin chains and sprockets?”. Pretty soon however, everyone adjusted and loved the new options of the ‘just the right gear’ feel.

Very soon, 10 speed arrived… followed shortly by 11. By now, cassettes had grown to the size of huge dinner plates and chains had got so thin that people were snapping chains just wafting near them with a pressure washer!

This notion that 10/11 speed chains are fragile compared to 8/9 speed is nonsense

Also strange macho approach that seems to say ‘I’m running a 1X11 system so am therefore rad to the max.

at first I figured 1x? Wasn’t really a big enough range but then thinking about it I singlespeed up pretty much all my local trails so if I can manage on 32:16 I can manage on a 32×11-36 and with the oneup and wolf dooberys 11-42 is now within easy reach and that’s only 1 gear short of my current 2×9 setup, seems a bit of a no brainer really, will be waiting till my current drive chain is worn out tho.

I might try it and not like it, I do like to sit and spin on FS so the slightly wider ratios may not suit me but I’m going to give it a go at some point.

I’m going 1×10 on my new hardtail, I’ll be using the hope T-rex to get 11-40 cassette with 34 ring. I decided to geek out on Excel and make simple gear chart to get an idea of the range going from 2x to 1x, I’ve also added in a 3×9 11-32 to give an idea of the difference (if anyone’s interested).

I’m happy being able to simplify my gearing, get a quieter cleaner setup, have less parts to fail, lower maintenance and running costs long term and loose about 250-300g off the current 2×10 I have. The negatives don’t bother me, I don’t need a large chainring as I’m not racing XC and if I’m planning on grinding roads or rough tracks I’ll take the CX bike out.

Bigger pic > http://ep1.pinkbike.org/p5pb10684686/p5pb10684686.jpg

XX1… best thing I ever did from a reliability and weight weenie perspective on all my bikes. Paul

and the bit everyone seems to miss about 11 vs 10 is even with the 40 or 42 big ring at the back it’s the 10sp that gives you the full extra range and the real one I will be missing on my adapted 1×10 setup.
30×11 is about the same as 33×10

I’m sure most people would go 1×11 if it was cheaper, and most new bikes are 10 speed so it’s minimal cost and bother.

oh and the only real convincing I need is the missus got it on her 29r race bike then went back to the Blur LTc and declared she wanted the 1×11 on that, 2x or 3x just felt like a big step backwards.

I don’t know how folk can whine on about marketing. Bikes are built and sold in the commercial sector. No marketing , no bikes.