the big ring??

Of course, if you’re the kind of person that drives to a muddy field to ride a few laps of it before driving home then you won’t need it but for getting between all the good bits fast a big ring is mandatory in my book. Horses for courses.

I suppose I’m lucky having very good riding a few miles up the hill when a lot of people only have the trail center/muddy field option.

I’ve ridden a double for about 2 years now and wouldn’t go back to triple. Currently run 36-26 with 11-34 on back. Tryin to convince my mate to ditch his triple but he thinks he needs it for the 500m he rides on road and downhill lol

I can’t see why you wouldn’t want a big ring.

I don’t even like a double on my road bike (jump between the rings is too big).

I can’t see why you wouldn’t want a big ring.

I loose 2/3 gears
It doesn’t cut up my calf
It doesn’t catch on rocks and knock teeth off
I never really used it
I don’t ride long flat trails
On technical trials I go faster by not braking than by pedalling in a 44t between the rocks (about 1/2 turn every so often)

From what I’ve heard you wouldn’t be using any of the gears on our trails, you’d be off walking.

Ah right, who have you heard this from?

I suppose I’m lucky having very good riding a few miles up the hill when a lot of people only have the trail center/muddy field option.

I’m not sure why these threads always turn into a ‘I have proper riding so I need a 22t and a 44t ring’ argument. People are different, you lose surprisingly little ditching a 44t, I know I was surprised. I rarely ride either fields or trail centres though.

Wow – you can tell it is raining outside – this could end up more fun than a religious thread 😀
Keep it going guys – my favourite so far is that a double ‘looks better’ – thanks Realman – almost as good as the ‘slammed stems’!

Am I the only person who usually coasts down boring road descents and get my breath back .It’s a mountain bike FFS the road bits are a necessary evil to get to the bits where I let rip.If I won’t to get up some speed on the road and get a KOM I’d use a road bike 😉

Ah right, who have you heard this from?

It’s written on the STW Scottish Chapter toilets wall.

I use mine quite a bit. Saves wear on the 32T. I did most of my climbing at the Wall in Afan in the big ring and use it on the roads going to back from a ride where I live. Then I use the middle most of the time on the trails and maybe sometimes will drop down to the granny.

on a crankset designed for a triple ring the chainline to the small cassette sprockets is better than staying in middle. If I had the choice on a new bike I would probably opt for a double specific set up with an 11-36T 10 speed cassette for better clearance but in terms of wear the more duplicate gearing the better as long as you manage your ratios properly.

Also remember larger gears mean less chain articulation which is better for the chain and sprockets which is why I use the big ring when cruising.

glenh – Member

I can’t see why you wouldn’t want a big ring.

i would never use it.

my chain would be need to be longer – but as i’d never be in the big ring the chain would always be looser/noisier

my lovely slx-double front mech wouldn’t work, and other mech’s don’t fit on my bike.

i’d need a long-cage rear mech.

and even if i went to the trouble* of setting my bike up to use a 3rd ring, i’d still never need/use it – cause i don’t need to pedal at over 30mph

…think of it like this, why don’t you have a 4th front ring?

Why don’t you only have one ring? Or only one gear?

cause i’m a pathetic weakling.

edit: my front rings are 26/32 – i know there’s a massive overlap, but i find the granny gear very usefull when my useless, pathetic, skinny legs have had enough.

and i do have a single-speed, it’s surprisingly versatile…

(i strongly suspect my next bike will be subjected to a 1x9or10 experiment)

I don’t have a singlespeed because it would be a compromise for my riding. 1×10 isn’t. Not difficult is it?

Took the big ring off my bike 5yrs ago (3×9) I don’t ride on the road so I never used it, bash guard much more useful.

3 x 8 here. Not as gnarrr as a lot of riders but it gets me everywhere I need to get to. Seem to have a lot less mechanicals though… 😉

Gorehound – Member

Still got 3×9 on all of our bikes and they’re staying that way. 2×10 and 1×11 are just more ways to rip us off IMO.

2×9 would cost you buttons (less than the cost of a big ring in fact). More than one way to skin a cat. And next time you need a middle ring you could step up to 36 or 38 and have almost the same gearing as you do now.

I did very briefly wish I had a 44T ring the other week, while road descending in the alps. But I think I’ll survive. Meanwhile the number of times not having a big ring has been useful are many more.

But if you don’t ride anywhere with limited ground clearance, and you don’t mind carrying excess weight, and you never catch your leg on the big ring and rip it open like you’ve been attacked by an evil cyborg with chainsaws for arms, then you’re probably fine with 3 rings 😉

have a SS a double and a triple
The middle one is the most useful
the big ring gets used but not that often and rarely offroad and on anything not very smooth/fast.
I supect a double an 10 speed

Not sure why it is such a heated debate as i aould assume it is the least used for all but awesome riders tbh

As always, it depends on the style of riding you do. My MTBs are used for decent road stretches on occasion because I use them more as a means of touring on a selection of surfaces than just a toy for blasting round technical trails.

You wont need it for the mary Townley loop 😉

I assume what you do is not typical of here though but of course you are correct.

44/32/22 has worked for me where I ride for the past 18 years or so, I doubt I’ll change now just because some “know it all” on a web forum tells me I’m doing it wrong.

Haha, brilliant! LOVE this argument…

I suppose you typed this on an 386 connected via dialup? Are you the guy I passed the other morning, commuting to work via horse and cart?

Its called progress! And more often than not its a good thing…

44:13 and 36:11 are not the same in theory or practice. Close enough might be close enough for you but for me it feels wrong. I suspect you’re the kind of guy that spends quite a lot in shaving grams off your bike, you could save a lot of money if you just took the “close enough” attitude to weight.

If you can tell the difference between 3.38:1 and 3.28:1 on your mountain bike, then I’d say that you’re probably way more likely to be the one going to the effort with silly light parts on their bike, not me! It’s less than the difference between running a 2.1″ or a 2.2″ tyre on the back of your bike in terms of gearing change!!! Infinitessimally small in the grand scheme of things…

As ever, the main thing all the nay Sayers forget is you can’t argue with maths!

Being able to run a shorter chain, shorter cage mech, have more ground clearance and crisper front shifting are sooooo much more beneficial to me than a 4:1 ratio is… I only have to lose one whole gear to get all those benefits, one that I never use anyway (even on road), so where’s the problem?

I doubt you’ll have passed him if he has a big ring. 🙂

There’s often a big difference between progress and fashion.

id like the big ring even more if i bought one in 38/40 tooth size. 42/44 teeth is too big for off road (i still got it though). i like being able to shift one chainring at the front to loose/gain a load of gear inches, rather than having to work my way from one side of the cassette to another.

Why were you commuting to work on a horse & cart, Rigs? 😉

I was in a new fangled tin box with wheels and an engine.

He was in the horse and cart! 😉

So will a 2×10 set up improve my riding, will I go faster, will I be able to do things I can’t do with my current 3×9

I need to spend a bit right now, replacing all the bits I need will be quite costly, but are the benefits worth it. When I point my bike at that steep, long muddy climb will this progress in equipment help me?

I need to spend a bit right now, replacing all the bits I need will be quite costly

2 rings cost less than 3.

that for me was the only real difference.

Less ratio duplications, less weight, simpler, and you can run a shorter chain and you have more ground clearance.

Probably not gonna make you more than 0.000001% faster oldgit, but it’ll be nicer to use and you’ll probably find you use more ratios on the cassette more often (spreading the wear) rather than just shifting the front ring but staying on the same 3/4 cassette ratios regardless as I know I did, and many others still do.

oldgit – Member

So will a 2×10 set up improve my riding, will I go faster, will I be able to do things I can’t do with my current 3×9

No. Maybe. Maybe.

I go faster with my 2×9, I reckon, because the 36T “middle” ring’s got a better spread of gearing than 32T does- I spend almost all the time descending in it, and most of the climbing, and reducing ring changes is good. But that’s trivial.

Things you can’t do- ever run out of ground clearance? If not, then it won’t make any dramatic difference IMO. I like rolling over steps and logs that I probably shouldn’t, so it’s definately saved me from a few messy exits. But again ymmv.

The way I see it is, it’s better, but it’s not gamechangingly better. I do reckon 2×10 or 2×9 should be the default option for mountain bikes, and that just like single ring, triple ring has its fans and they can sort it out themselves.

Going to Google the costs, just bought a brand new XT cassette and KMC chain which has only been span in the workshop.

So will a 2×10 set up improve my riding, will I go faster, will I be able to do things I can’t do with my current 3×9

There are lots of other advantages to a double over a triple though. It’s lighter, it looks better, it’s easier to clean (less places for mud to get trapped), and it wears more evenly. No more 90% worn middle rings destroying your cassette early whilst your little and big ring are still near perfect. A lot less shifting too, with a double. Big ring for descending, little ring for climbing.

Why go 2×10? 2×9 is cool too. Front mech has to do less as well so you get better shifting IME – and you get better use of the cassette in each chain ring – I can get all 9 gears on both chain rings.

Do you mean put new rings/ratios on my current XT chainset?

The main benefit for me of getting rid of the big ring was being able o fit a chain device. Since that’s on the chain hasn’t come off once which did happen often enough halfway down a decent which messes the flow up if you have to stop and put it back on. Not very often have I felt the need for extra gears and then it was only on boring road bits between singletrack sections

Do you mean put new rings/ratios on my current XT chainset?

Like this? Sure, why not?

I think triples still work! Depends on where and how you ride. For my doorstep riding which is unfortunately pretty flat I use 3×9 and mostly ride in the big ring (11-32 and 22/34/46) and use the 46/11 for most of the 4 mile return home (Constant, slight downhill slope.). Yes, could remove my inner chainring but I do occasionally use that bike for ‘big day out in the hill rides’ and don’t want to faff about too much changing stuff. I do however run a double and bash (2×9) on my all mountain bike which I use for my technical and steep rides (Up and down) and on this I run 11-34 and 26/38.

Both work for me – why do I need to change either…? I also commit the heinous crime of running a triple on my road bike…

Well I need two new rings anyway. Thinking about it my MTB gets used about a dozen times a year tops, as well as regular summer races. So it’s probably not worth the cost.
So I’m going to order the Blackspire Pro rings 26 and 38t to use with my 11-32 XT cassette.

Blackspire have always worked for me – wear very well in my experience.

I used TA Chinooks in 28/40, found it a good combination.

So if you ditch the 44t on an existing triple XT set up, can the existing front mech be ‘limit-screwed’ to prevent inadvertent shifting onto the bash ring? And what would be the largest cog you could fit in the ‘middle’ ring position and still get a sweet shift from the original front mech? Genuine questions; I think I’d try dropping the 44t if the outlay was pretty minimal, but would the stock kit work with the 26/38 cogs that Oldgit’s talking about?

I got rid of my big ring ages ago after some nasty scraping over rocks in the Avalanche Enduro at Kielder – never looked back, especially now I have the SLX double and bash with a 36t ring.

I had also previously made a fairly hefty gouge in the back of my leg from an OTB incident – big ring is a bad idea imo.