4 BIG PROBLEMS Of 1x10, 1x11, 1x12 Drivetrains. 1 By Drivetrain - THE TRUTH. Part 1.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ส.ค. 2024
- This is the first part of 1x12 drivetrains review.
Part 1: • 4 BIG PROBLEMS Of 1x10...
Part 2: • The TRUTH About 1x12 S...
Part 3: • If you were close to X... - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
Part 2: th-cam.com/video/vTTfcHeM2jc/w-d-xo.html
Sram Eagle on SALE: tidd.ly/3ea8aeea
Need an offset chainring..
2:09 backpedaling issue is solved by thinning out the thickness of the right rear dropout by use of a spinning grinder, a thinner dropout improves the farthest distance of the biggest cog to the chainring, they do this with the brand Sride 1x12, its a bit tedious metal work but effective or it may be solved if the chainring can be be moved inward further if possible without thinning the bottom bracket shell,
4:17 and 8:22 problems are apparent for weaker riders, 1x drivetrain is for bikers who can also do jogging on the mountains, sufficient stamina to compensate for the lack of gears, and stronger riders can use smaller cogs not to inflict friction on the chain from using huge cogs
8:58 is basically logical from the get go, bending the chain by using a single chainring really wears down the chain faster, i wonder if manufacturers used a special mix of metals for the chain specifically made for 1x setup, it should be supple but at the same time rigid enough not to stretch quickly, maybe because Shimano charges more on their price tag because of that physical characteristic of their chain, but since its only logical to perceive that problem, instead, i decided to downgrade the cassette sprocket down to 8 speed only to be gentle on the chain and use my stamina to compensate for the losses, in 34t ring, it is as if im climbing a steep gradient using a compact road crank of 50/34 only without the 50t and a sprocket not exceeding 42t 8speed, it depends on the track, if there are short changes to the gradient i use 1x, if the gradient change is long enough i use a bike that has a semi 1x, its actually a 2x but only without using a front derailleur, the seat tube is empty, just tough it out for the time loss only to get rid of that front derailleur lol
I come back here to check your concern about 1x system which i watched years ago. Mainly because i just learn about Campagnolo Ekar system. So can you give some insight of the new campy 1x13 groupset? Thanks bro.
From someone inside the industry.... The reason the industry pushed you into this. 1. Fewer parts to inventory and buy for manufacturing and warehousing for warranty and replacment sales. 2.Fewer parts that needed enginering and design year after year on the bikes drive train . 3.The fewer steps and faster assymbly results in labor savings in all aspects of bike manufacturing from spec., purchasing, warehousing, assymbly, packaging, shipping cost due to lower weight and more. 4. 1x opened up more options for suspension and frame design that again reduced cost of manufacturing.
You were pushed into 1x not for your riding benifit but for greater profitability of the manufacture.
Exactly...
Well, to be honest, the triple was in itself a workaround for getting that insane gear range while engineers didn't quite figure out how to get the range solely on cassette with reliable shifting. SRAM was simply the first to realize/remember about that and jumped the gun.
The only people that a 1x would sell to are those naive weekend poser riders. If you're a serious non-sponsored mtb racer who knows the benefit of quickly downshifting 3 or 4 gear ratios with a single drop of the chainring, the 1x marketing pitches are BS
@@josephcuison5412 those "poser weekend riders" are the bulk of the revenue for these bike companies. I fail to differentiate between a serious rider and a "poser" as you state simply by the choice of drivetrain. Sounds like a whole bunch of snobbery on your part, are you sure you shouldn't be on a road bike instead?
Well said. Don't forget that also you need to replace more often because the teeth and chain are thinner metal... Again, more money to the manufacturer.
It's a huge advantage to hear the opinion of someone that has actually used and experienced the different options available. Thank you.
Eddy Merckx crushed everyone on a 2 x 5.
Whatever you have, enjoy it, ride it, love it, and forget all the BS marketing hype.
Yeah and the other riders all had 2 x 5. Try racing 2 x 5 today against other riders using 2 x 11 and let me know how that goes
@@dougantelman2369 hers decades later on latest tech ..still super hard to beat him th-cam.com/video/bs8NJTotUbI/w-d-xo.html
@@dougantelman2369 about as well as using a single chainring went for Aqua Blue lololol
Those drivetrains last forever.... This is why they change them, more $$$, less durable.
@@dougantelman2369 Are you competing at Tour de France Doug 'Cause most of us don' t, and i don't care what the industry would like me to buy. I have a vintage 2x6 italian roadie, it's so fast and nimble it's scary. Rides like a dream. But you go ahead and race on your carbon taiwanese bike, son. Whatever makes you happy!
I've been using 1x for over a year and respectfully disagree with many of the conclusions drawn in this video. But I also approach 1x from a different perspective: road cycling. I don't do mountain biking, cyclo-cross, gravel or cross-country. Let's address the 5 "problems" in the order presented in the video:
1 - Chainline and back-pedaling
In my opinion, the biggest error demonstrated in this video was a bad chainline in some of the author's bikes, then blaming the 1x system for it. The true problem was this: the author's chainring was not centered properly to his cassette, period. You cannot expect any drivetrain (1x, 2x, 3x) to perform properly with a faulty chainline. Singling out a 1x was wrong. Any bike mechanic worth his/her salt will quickly tell you how many bikes have bad chainlines -- even from respected manufacturers. One of the worst I've ever seen was on a Specialized Ruby Elite with a 3x10 Shimano 105 drivetrain. The only non-Shimano component in the drivetrain was an FSA crank and it located the center chainring almost 7 mm outside of the centerline of the cassette. You can imagine how badly off-center the large chainring was -- it was atrocious!
When I converted my road bike to 1x, I was very careful to create a good chainline. I've never had any back-pedaling problem whatsoever. My SRAM Red crank has a Stages Cycling power meter on its crank arm. So I back-pedal frequently to activate it and pair it to my cycling computer before each ride begins. I back-pedal for several minutes each time I lubricate my chain -- which is often since I cycle 5000-6000 miles per year (8045-9656 km). Never has it dropped off the biggest gear! Nor has it ever sounded bad!
2 - Power loss
As above, this was primarily a chainline problem. If the chainring was properly centered to the cassette, the chain would be quieter because there would be less friction when cross-chaining. And let's remember that cross-chaining should be less of a problem for a 1x drivetrain than any other setup (2x or 3x) because the 1x has only one chainring and, if it is properly centered to the centerline of the cassette, the offset of the chain at either cross-chaining extreme will be less. This is simple geometry.
If the chainline is properly centered, the biggest reason, in my experience, why some 1x drivetrains are a little noisier compared to a 2x is because of the alternating fat/narrow teeth on the 1x chainring. The wide teeth rub the plates of the chain more than the all-narrow teeth of 2x chainrings. This is more noticeable when cross-chaining.
But the issue of power loss presented in this video focused on only one part of a complicated issue. There are both benefits and deficits for these kinds of 1x chainrings. First, let's remember that they were designed with cyclo-cross in mind. The designers were thinking how to make it harder to drop a chain while improving efficiency of a dirty drivetrain. SRAM's X-Sync 1x chainrings claim to: (1) engage the chain pins earlier so more links are simultaneously pushed by the teeth, and (2) clear mud from the chain. If the first claim is true, it should add to the efficiency. Will it offset the increased resistance from the fat teeth? I don't know. And neither does the author of this video. I think it will take careful testing on a bike with a properly centered chainline and a power meter before any conclusions can be drawn. As for the second claimed benefit of clearing mud, that was addressed by the video in its 5th "problem" discussed below.
3 - Lack of gears
There's no argument here on the main issue. When you convert from a 2x or 3x to a 1x, you will have to give up some gear ratios. You might give up your largest ratios and have less top-end speed. Or you might give up your smallest radios and have less cadence on the steepest climbs. Or you may give up a little of both. This is the best reason why a 1x system is not for everyone. Each individual cyclist must assess his/her needs and choose a drivetrain that best satisfies them.
However, I disagree here with what I perceive as the "smaller" issue of cadence. Don't get me wrong: cadence is extremely important and I've lived with a power meter long enough to know all too well why a high cadence is often better than a low cadence when a high power output must be sustained. What I disagree about is how many gears we actually need. In my opinion, we've got too many! Perhaps my opinion is colored by my history. I started with 2x6 road drivetrains in the mid 80's and it seemed like plenty to me. I rode for years over all kinds of terrain with 52,42t chainrings up front and a 14-30t 6-speed cassette at the back. The only thing I wanted was more top-end. I almost never used the small chainring.
A 1x10 or 1x11 provides plenty of gear steps to maintain an 80-90 rpm cadence on most any road. Riders who claim to need more and finer steps between gear ratios in order to fine-tune their cadence seem crazy to me. I honestly believe that the only reason we have so many gears on our bikes today is because of marketing by bike manufacturers who each try to out-do the other so you will buy their bike instead of a competitor's bike. You may not agree with me on this point -- and that's fine. But I, for one, only use an 11-speed cassette because I'm forced to because virtually all of the rear derailleurs that I'm interested in, use them. For example, if you need multiple shift points (handlebars and aerobars) you'll have to use an electronic drivetrain and all of their rear derailleurs are 11-speed.
4 - Higher maintenance
Yet again, this comes back to the chainline problems demonstrated in the video. Until you fix the chainline problem -- that is, until you properly center the chainring to the cassette -- you cannot blame the 1x for higher maintenance. After many thousands of miles, I've seen zero indication of increased wear on my chain, cassette, rear derailleur or chainring.
5 - More frequent chain-drop from chainring
The video claimed that dried mud on the wide teeth of a 1x chainring caused the chain to come off the 1x chainring more frequently than a 2x setup. I'll take the author's word for this problem because I have no experience with it. I'm not exposing my road bike to the kinds of harsh conditions that the author exposes his bikes to and I'm using a much larger 50t chainring. Yet it seems that the faulty chainline in the author's bikes may play a mitigating factor here. If the incidence of dropped chains correlates to his 1x chainrings not being properly centered to his cassettes, then the faulty chainline may bear a large part of the blame -- not the wide teeth of the 1x chainring.
My road bike has a composite carbon frame so dropping a chain can be extra serious. I've seen lots and lots of composite bikes with severe damage to the bottom bracket shell when a chain dropped past the inner chainring on a 2x setup and began to cut through the carbon before the rider stopped trying to pedal. When I used a 2x drivetrain with my frame, I always made sure to protect the frame with a chain catcher. With my 1x setup, there has been no need for one. So, if you are not exposing your bike to mud and other hazards, a proper 1x setup should have far less risk of dropping a chain.
Plus, these new 1x chainrings are still a work in progress. As I understand it, SRAM made design changes to the teeth of their X-Sync chainrings last year. I'm using one of the original ones on my bike and I haven't had a chance to see one of the new ones yet and therefore don't know what differences were made. Perhaps SRAM has improved theirs so this isn't an issue any longer. I don't know. But there is still on-going work in this area and updated products are coming to market.
Summary
------------------------------------
Because the 1x chainring of some of the bikes in this video appeared to be offset from the centerline of the cassette, the chainline (or driveline) was faulty. For this reason alone, many of the conclusions drawn by the author were premature, if not incorrect. How should you configure the chainline for a 1x drivetrain? Intuition would lead most of us bike mechanics to locate the chainring dead-center to the centerline of the cassette. In this case, the offset of cross-chaining would be identical whether you chose the smallest gear or the largest gear. However, SRAM (with which I'm most familiar), advises favoring the outside a little. So I set my chainring a little over 1 mm to the outside of the driveline. This means the cross-chaining offset is a little less when I'm shifted into my smallest (fastest) gear vs my largest (slowest) gear. This seems to work fine for me. And, as I mentioned above, I've has zero problem with using my largest gear -- even when back-pedaling.
Seriously you had this much time to write this..... are you sure you don't have invested interest ........
just ride your bike.
I just read this comment and paid no more attention to the video. My expectations were blown.
D.Eldon Great piece, I just picked up my bike after a Scram Apex 42T installation and love it so far
D.Eldon Thanks for the comment. I’m very interested in knowing your road setup. Could you share it with us?
I'm not a serious mtb rider, but my 1x11 gears have the perfect range for me. I hate dealing with a front derailleur
I've just got a SRAM SX eagle 12-1 group set and I love it, so much easier 👍
If you're not serious and have little experience, how do you know what the perfect range is??
medal for comment to normie x , saying things just becouse hear lot of kids saying same , and going with bike to shop after milk is defo not a good idea to deal with front derailleur!
@@rochester212 Well I can go up hills and downhills without feeling like I need to shift anymore.
The small sprocket is good for rolling over trees too
@@rochester212 Just got my new bike with sram nx 1x12, i would say range is the same as 3x9, maybe top speed is little bit lower, but 1x12 is so much easier, you dont have to think about chainline, dont need front shifter, all you need is 2 options: up or down.
Running an old 3x9 system I find changing gear second nature now. I have better gear ratio than most 1x systems and by not crossing the chain I never have issues with chain skipping or dropping. And the money saved by keeping the old school set up allowed me to buy a dropper post, new forks and saddle, and two sets of tubeless tyres.
You're clever. I continue using my 26" mtn bike, bought XT
3x9 transmission very cheap and I’m not led by marketers.
I use a 3×8 gear and I'm happy with that.. and I just saw that the cost of SRAM Eagle is even more than the MTB I own 🤣🤣
I run a 3x10, they called me a madman. I left them to eat dust 😂😂
Jeffu- Sama that’s what I’m gonna try next week. Currently I have 3x7, but I have a 10-46T cassette in mail! I was thinking about going 2x10, but after reading you comment, I think I’ll give a good try to 3x10!
I also ride 3x10, (Deore), and my bicycle is like working horse (meaning that I put trailer for my kid sometimes, paniers on longer trips, lots of extra weight) and it is able to do all the climbs etc
He's right about the range..
I love that feeling of dropping a front cog on a sharp, quick hill...
but what I don't love is when you get a chain drop going to the bottom chainring on a short climb fweeeeeeeeeeeeee, pedaling to nowhere haha.
@@mrvwbug4423 never happened with my 2x10
the feeling of applying brute force with the chain on the carbon fiber frame
@@rodrigofajardo630 I know what you mean. Dropped twice on mine and damaged my frame. Are you riding a 1 or 2x?
@@mrvwbug4423 I've only ever had it on a decent.
It is funny that every new trend (I won't call them innovations) is sold as a replacement, not as a supplement, to all that is currently sold. The manufacturers have to legitimize your purchase of parts you don't probably need by convincing you that you are falling out of fashion and losing time if you don't buy the new stuff. Are 1x setups better? For some riders and situations they absolutely are. Are 2x and even 3x setups better for some riders? Absolutely they are. We need to stop trying to buy ourselves into being faster or more fit and try to do it through riding what we have.
Michael Wheeler I bought a clearance priced chainring and removed parts. Not really that arduous of a process impressed on me by the big evil industry.
1x setups are actually still pretty infant, at least on the side of the large manufacturers. The smaller ones satisfied an existing demand with narrow/wide chainrings, conversion kits and what not. They didn't push anything, they just saw a demand for something that was not too readily available. And so, just now are Shimano and Sram catching up with this trend. There's a huge demand for 1x setups and nobody is pushing it. Manufacturers are struggling to keep up.
27,5 and 29 wheels have overthrown 26" wheels. Many see it as a conspiracy of manufacturers. But consider the fact that all three sizes have been available for several years. It's just that sales of one of the sizes were not justifying continued investments. That's why most brands don't have high-end 26" bikes. They just don't sell.
if you think of it, 26" wasn't established because it was the best possible solution, but because at the time it was the most common on mountain bikes. So all the research and development was made around a 26" wheel. It was a trend at the time and it took a long time to make a viable alternative. When the alternative was available, people spoke with their wallets.
thats it...I agree.
Limited; Romanticizing a new thing is pushing for sales. dropping production of something that has slowed in sales is creating market. notice how the two are linked. Even I would not stock 26" bikes right now because there is too much hype for the bigger wheels. I'm sure that Nino would beat me senseless on a three-by, 26r. A wise man once said " Skip the hype, ride the bike..."
There is a large population of MTB riders who ride purely for fun and not competitively. Many of us also ride highly technical trails that require mix of climbing and downhill, not to mention highly varied version of both. 1x and "lighter weight this" "less chain drop that" are all fine and dandy, but I'd rather get a wider range so I can climb more efficiently, and if the chain drops going DH (which is usually where it happens), it's not going to prevent me from going DH. 1x setups actually benefit you in way fewer situations than what manufacturers are trying to promote, and it's more of a fad fueled by ignorance and marketing than anything else.
The industry is laughing at us. As a civil Engineer I can tell you that chains are designed to transfer direct stresses from one point to another, in other words to apply power from a given prime source to a receptor, they wear badly when lateral stresses are applied and yet that is exactly what the "1" by systems do. The industry knows that, of course, but that ensures that it makes more money out of the customer. Wear on the reduced elements increases proportionately. As a consequence, the cassette will require more frequent replacement than a system incorporating a triple or double chainring. So will the chainring. The triple and double chainring systems are designed for a purpose and that purpose has not been diminished in imperative by Bike Industry "fashions". Be clear......ultimately the single chainring is an expensive experiment. This chap here is quite right in his analysis and if riders do not like his perspective...for their own reasons...that simply does not obfuscate the basic laws of engineering.
I agree. It is all marketing to maintain or increase profits. Innovate or die is the phrase that comes to mind. In this case innovation does not always equal better. That being said I do find that my new mountain bikes 1 x 12 Sram Eagle system has the big advantage to me in that I no longer have chain slap against the rear chain on a fast bouncy decent, chain suck, failure of the chain to shift to the lowest chainring when starting a climb, or drop the chain off the small chainring when making a big downshift from the large chainring at the start of a steep climb(happens quite a bit even with the front derailleur properly adjusted). Also I have never experienced a chain drop-down from backpedaling. In addition it is great to have the dropper post lever mounted where the front chainring lever used to be. But I do miss the lower gearing on really steep climbs in terms of cadence that a 3x system provides. However, I will stick with the 3x system on my road bikes as I don’t see any positives to switching to the 1x system, only negatives in terms of cadence, friction, and wear and tear.
They both have advantages i cant understand your argument that its an industry conspiracy.
Any fixed gear/single speed rider knows that from experience and when they try to speak out .. Nothing. Very close minds. The derailleur itself is huge loss because of the few sweeps that chain does around it.
I agree with Bob. 2x and 3x is nice as it allows you to help avoid crosschaining, and has more of a selection for gear ranges. But 1x is also nice because you only have one shifter to worry about, and can use a southpaw lever where the front shifter was for the dropper seatpost. That is one of the main reasons why I'm switching to 1x on my mountain bike.
hi: is 2x10 best?
thx
Thanks for sharing your opinion and experience!
I would say that there is a lot of logic in your words. 1x could fit in some circumstances but is definitely not what they say it is.
On my trail and on my road bike I use 2x10 and from my point of view and experience I think 2x10 is the most balanced gear type - not so expensive, very reliable (chain drop, chain and cassette wearing, etc.) , enough gear ratios for speed and for climbs. Another very useful thing of the front derailleur is that it can put your chain back on the front chain ring if it drops off, just by pushing your left shifter.
For sure all these different standards have one goal - the profit of the industry. Some new ideas and technologies are of great benefit for the users, but most of the time is just marketing.
I don't know about you guys, but I pedal my bike forward.
Dave Thorp *oh wtf why you do that bro we all pedal backwards you go faster*
I actaully do pedal backwards, when doing DH to get my pedals in the correct position if i dont want to lay down any extra power :)
when I need to get the pedals in the correct position to balance in steep uphills.
I've had this screw me on steep technical climbs a few times when I've had to ratchet or clear a pedal and going forward wasn't a choice
You definitely got sold on the 1x fad.
for riding technical trails I often found that trying to change the front chain ring gears fast resulted in chain drops or chain jams. I'm testing the 1x drive train now and so far it seems better for me. Also, I never run out of low end or top end speed on those kind of trails with steep uphills and technical downhills.
Chris Krajewski yeah 1x is just better, why would they otherwise not make a beeter 2x and are pros using it ;)
I think you have some good points and you are right that the new fancy stuff always seems to cost more for minimal (or no) performance gains. I consider my small chainring my 1x because where I live (mountains) you generally only need your big ring on the downhill! You can really see the mountain biking industry in the last 10 years has so many different standards/sizes for everything from drive trains to axles to wheels to suspension. It is great to have choices but sometimes it is a bit much.
Everyone should try 2x11 and 1x11 before buying a new bike, I find it more a personal preference than anything else. I have the cheapest SRAM NX 1x11 system and it works great for me on my hardtail. No backpedalling problems and downhill speed is a non-issue since when you're going 40kph+ you're not going to pedal anyway since it's too bumpy and pedal strikes can occur.
I agree that the components wear faster and it could be an issue on some more high-end groupsets which tend to wear faster anyway and are more expensive to replace all the time.
Anyway, try both and see which you prefer.
in ten years, there will be a new revolution: 2x and 3X. The advertising will have all the points made in this video and tout how the 2X is so much better and efficient than the 1X. You watch.
We will be told that we will need to ditch the 1x for the new 2X
and then,
what was old is new again,
probably keep on running
my 3x as I am only a hobbyist
mountain biker
Of course there will. We all used to ride 1x way back in the day ffs, but then people invented the 2x and 3x because it was an improvement! More gears gave you more options, smaller "jumps" between gears etc. That didn't suddenly just stop being the case. It's quite clearly a marketing push and nothing else.
And they will probably promote smaller wheels to use with them. To bad my components are wearing out by now so I followed the industry and ordered a 29 inch with 1x12, although I am not convinced at all it is a upgrade, and less so by watching these kind of video's that agree with my theories.
Don't forget 26", which comeback will probably be marketed as "most fun and exciting MTB ride ever" . Which for the most part it is.
I still ride a 26" 9 speed triple....
I bought one like 2 days ago ROFL. I love it :D
Me too and probably never switch to 1x or 2x 🤣🤣🤣
I still ride my 26" 3x8 bike too but I also 29er 1x10. They are so different especially with much wider handle bars but my 29er is lighter, faster and rolls over obstacles much easier. Wheel size matters in more speed and rolling over obstacles. Sure my 29er has a better fork but still.
I ride rigid 26 with 3x7, but actually, only the biggest front chainring works. That bike kicked asses in local XC and marathon races against 26 full suspension bikes 3x9 back in the days
I still ride my 3x7 GT RTS (1995). Still works great for me, so I just keep it.
1. Nobody needs to backpedal 8 rotations super quickly in any situation
2. Riders DO have a choice. 2017 uci downhill in vallnord saw many 29" bike riders switch back to older bikes on 27.5. Why? Because it made them faster, and that's what matters.
3. They don't have to use what the company specs on the bike. One of the pro downhill bikes (forgot what event, but I can find it if it's super important) had a custom rear shock built by the team mechanic, again because it made them faster.
4. While the louder cassette does show there is power loss, I would have to argue that the loss of weight from removing 2 rings, 4-8 bolts, and extra crank material will make up for the power loss.
5. The "lack of gears" argument is total bs. With 2x and 3x drivetrains, many of the gear ratios overlap, so a bike with 20 or 30 combinations only truly has 12-15. On a more personal side, I run state XC races with a 11-34 10sp with a 38t up front. I don't even use my lower 3 gears, so don't tell me that I need A) more weight and B) another point of failure.
5. The lack of cadence argument doesn't matter, because this isn't road biking. Mountain biking is designed to make riders deal with rapid changes that are dealt with by either rapid pedaling or slow, powerful strokes. And again, you don't get that many more unique gears.
6. A 500% range in gears for now 500$ with gx eagle will provide for plenty of range, with great affordability. This means that for 500$, someone could outfit their bike for enduro type events.
7. If you are running out of gear, get a bigger chainring.
8. Matinence with a 1x is cheaper and easier than a 2x or 3x. While it *might* wear out faster, you are not replacing front cogs or a front derailleur. And if the chain is your main concern, just find a kmc x10, X11, or x12 sl dlc chain for ~60$ (with some shopping), and never change a chain again. I've had dropping problems with shimano chains due to stretch as early as 6 months in, but have been running the same kmc chain for close to 3 years now.
9. The chain would pull on the rear derailleur anyways, and carbon flexes without fatiguing, so it wouldn't matter anyways.
10. If you really don't like 1x systems, why do all of the bikes shown run 1x?
11. Dropping a chain in 1x is easier to fix than dropping on a 2-3x. A 2-3x also runs the risk of twisting a chain or pinching the chain if it catches. 1x drivetrains are also less likely to drop because of clutch mechanisms holding tension and front cogs, such as wolftooth, having longer than standard teeth to lock in gears in addition to more effectively designed teeth. I will add in that I have dropped chains on the 1x system, but these drops were due to chain stretch, a disengaged clutch, a worn out narrow wide with shorter teeth, and bad line choice, but only took 5s to fix. Also, chain guides exist.
12. The new sram narrow wide cogs are now made with longer teeth and more efficient mud shedding geometry than present on 2x and 3x systems.
Going back to the price argument, with a 1x, you won't have to buy a front shifter, front derailleur, or front cogs.
13. You don't get enough speed because you put a 30t on it like a tard.
14. The fact that you chose the bike with the smallest gear range, chain hop when reversing, and the one that's more road oriented than mountain oriented is pretty ironic and counter intuitive from my perspective. Just saying.
Truth. This guys arguments are weak. None of it really makes much sense when you think about hard enough. From the sounds of it he comes from a road background where these things might matter. Also, if that marin gravel bike came into my shop it would get a good laugh at for have tri bars on it 😂
To be honest I held back from 1x for a while. I converted a 2x10 to 1x just to see. Moving the front chainring more inboard so it is more in-between the original 2 chainrings. In extremes the angle is fine and I get zero problems if I were to back pedal. Will I go back to 2x? No
I agree whole heartedly with you.
I have 42t single and never drop chain unless stretch or parts problems and I got a front anti drop de railer . Seem to do the job .
Lack of gears is the killer. When I bought a Mach4, I could not afford the 2x build kit ($1200 more than the base model). So I'm living with a 1x11. The lowest gear is barely adequate, and the highest gear SUCKS, I can't goose it on those fast downhills.
I have 511% range on my 1x11.. My lowest is perfect, my highest is perfect.
Ed, I found I, too, lost range when I went with a 1x10. Not only that, but I’d have to run through all 10 gears to get from high to low, instead of just dropping into my smaller chainring. I went back to 2x10, because wanted the extended range.
I bought Merida one twenty and realised quickly I wasn’t getting the speed I wanted in the lowest gear. Found I ran out of gears so quick. So I change from the 32 round chainring to a 36 oval. Gives me about 3 more gears to drop and I get the speed I want. Love the bike now. I found before changing to the oval I was only using 5 gears out of 12 now am using 8 or 9 out of 12 now.
Tested 1x11 for about 4 months now (27.5 Enduro bike with 32t to 11-42) and I have to say it works great for me. Lowest gear is more than enough for the climbs I do. I agree with you that you could spin out on in the highest gear but this only happens to me on the road sometimes. On the trail I have none such issues because if I go faster then this gear would allow me I wouldn't want to pedal or wouldn't be able to cause of the terrain. My bike came with 3x10 and I had serious chain drop problems in the front nearly every second ride. Now they are gone with a little top guide. Also I found myself like never using the 40t chainring especially off road. So long speech short: 1x11 works really well for me on Enduro, freeride but I see that in other categories where your cadence and pedaling skills are more important 2x10 or 2x11 would be better. Cheers.
thx ShaiBike, I didn't change down because I didn't see how 1by could offer the range i want. My MTB is for all terrains + fun commute days. Sticking to 2by. I feel like left behind when new bikes are at the park / lights, in their pretty group sets, but having the range makes all the difference day after day. AND I never need to change setup for the next event. lLve the channel. Go Poland, great decade for pro racing!
Have been eyeing the 1x11 bikes and admiring the industry effort to put such a system together as a wide spread standard. Previously, I road a 1x1 mtn bike and really appreciated the simplicity. Obviously this is very different than 1x11 but not having a front derailleur lends to just more focus on the peddling. I have also spend a great deal of time on 2x10, 3x10, and 2x11. For mountain and road bikes, my vote is the 2x. With 2x the range for high and low can be better grouped with decent chain lines, and more often than not the front chain ring will stay in one ring most often. But this does depend on the cassette group you have and where you ride. Where I live, it is modestly hilly. Therefore my lower range gets the most use. So again a clean chain line is important. I believe most people will not bother with refining these details of their bike and just go with the stock setup. And this is maybe why 1x11 -etc. had gained popularity, intending to try to keep the drive train simple for the average rider.
Having an extreme chain line with questionable low gears seems less appealing.
Additionally, when I look at the back wheel with all that metal and think shouldn't the rear wheel be lighter.. I mean this is where all the power is being pushed to and should not be bogged down with all these monster sprockets.. The weight comparison has got to be more for the same gear ratios. Maybe someone should do a video on that.. Personally, I like to keep the bike light. With 2x all those cassette sprockets can be smaller, with only the one additional chain ring on the crank. ( maybe with the extra shifter and front derailleur it all evens out, but would be fun to reveal)
One thing that is appealing for 1x is the amount of torque and leverage when using a smaller chain ring with the bigger cassette rings.. For off-road this ideal especially with the lower range.
Maybe being a little more old school, I am more biased.. I am sure that at some point my 2x drive trains will be toasted, and if 1x is still a thing I will be joining the club but only as a last resort.
For the only 1by system is for a commuter where your gear range needs are narrow (specially for a near flat route) so even a 1x5 should be more than enough.
Say 48x14-24.
Hey, sick biker; 3 things you may have forgotten to consider.. ; 1. The brand of the chainring compared to the brand of the chain. 2. The brand of the biggest rear cog compared to the brand of the chain again. 3. The proper alignment of the chainring using spacers if needed! I've been using 1x10 for 4 years now , and sometimes the chain drops if I pedal backwards on the biggest gear in the rear ( 30tx 42t) , I personally think that the only way to know if your chain is lined up right, is that when you see a 100% straight line chain when you shift to the 5th gear if you're 1x10. This is just my personal experience.
#1 - gear skip on backpedal - good demonstration, but in 3 years of riding 1x10, I've never had it happen.
#2 - power loss - Sure there's a bit of power loss in the chain line, but there is power loss in a 2x or 3x setup too, just to a smaller degree. So it's not like you're NOT losing power with a 2x or 3x, so it's a matter of degree...probably fractions to single digits of watts. How much power is the extra weight of a 2x setup costing you on the same climb?
#3 - Lack of gears. Absolutely fewer gears. But for most people on most trails most of the time, they don't use the full range anyway. So do you want a bike that's optimized for 95% of your riding? Or add weight, cost, and complexity just to pick up that extra 5%? But your point about racing is spot on - if you're a competitive race, you might use the extra gears.
#4 - Maintenance - any additional maintenance induced be 1x would, IMO, be more than offset by eliminating maintenance on the front derailleur and its associated components.
#5 - chain drop - again, it just doesn't happen for most people (more than on a 2x or 3x) with a proper setup.
I agree with Martin - great video with good demonstrations and kudos for selecting a range of bikes. But your "big problems" are not "real world problems" and don't outweigh the "real world advantages" of 1x for most people.
What would you say the real world advantages of a 1x are for most people?
gmatochautube wow so you bought a one by bike and are trying like hell to justify it. I hope you love whatever you ride, but don't try to sell it so hard. That lack of range is real. No reason to deny it.
And the cost savings is not so great when you look at the price to replace an 11 speed cassette, and it will need to be changed more often because of the dreadful chain-line, ditto on the derailleur.
One of the main advantages (at least for me) is the reduced weight by removing my front derailleur, and a chainring. This ,of course, is a preference. You can offset the added weight of a 2X or 3X system by the wider gear ratio. However, that means more maintenance with the 2X or 3X system (derailleur, cables, housing, and more chainrings to take care of and replace when worn). 1X doesn't give you the same amount of gear ratios but to me I don't need a wide range of gear ratios. However, in 2X and 3X systems you ratios overlapping so the difference isn't as big as one imagines. I would go for a 2X system if I'm racing to get some good speed from a larger chainring, which I wouldn't use when commuting around the city. If you think of converting your bike to a 1X system make sure you set it up properly. Key factor (for me) was the chain alignment, with 11 and 12 speed cassettes because they cause the chain to be in an awkward position (i.e. not being straight in the drivetrain) making it susceptible to dropping.
In summary: reduced weight, and less parts to maintain/fix/replace :)
I completely agree with you! @gmatochautube Well said.
As a clydesdale size rider these points are even more extreme for me. I'll be sticking to my 2x. Thanks for the honest video.
Any recommendations for a 6 ' 7" struggling to find a reasonably prized Clydesdale type MTB?
My pros and cons:
+ 1x lets me focus on the trail and not on shifting - great help on unknown technical trails when you don't know what's around the corner.
+ Dropper lever doesn't fight for space with the shifter.
+ Lighter.
+ No dropped chains when narrow wide chainring was new-ish, no chain device.
+ No backpedalling issues.
+ 32x(11-36) on 27.5 is just fine for the trails I ride (no roads, no smooth downhills).
+ More clearance (smaller chainring).
+ Can use Zee derailleur - super compact, light, cheap & works great.
- Chainline not perfect (need to get some spacers for chainring next time). But it's okay, no backpedalling issues.
- Dropped chain a few times now (chainring worn out).
- Chainring wears out quicker.
Verdict: I'm loving my 1x10 converted from 1x20 :-)
I think there is entirely too much hype surrounding the latest greatest bicycle stuff. Truth of the matter is unless you are physically capable of placing in the top 10 in just about any race consistently, then you are just spending money to spend money. Chris Froome for example would still kick your ass on a 200 dollar 3x7 Tourney groupset bike from Walmart if he didn't explode the bottom bracket out of it. People are always so concerned about the latest greatest lightest stuff...you want lighter? Put down the cake and pedal more. You want faster? Train harder. The thing that makes the most difference on a bicycle is the legs pushing on the pedals.If I get dropped, it has nothing to do with what bike I am on, it all has to do with ME and that is free to upgrade...with work and effort. Some of the fastest people I know are riding steel bikes from the 70's-90's they pulled out of scrap piles and restored.
well said.
Wise comment, cheers!
Best comment
Most gains are noticed at 20 mph. Not exactly difficult to hold and see those gains
Dam straight
Stay truthful and honest my friend! Excellent work! Your ligic is SOLID. 👍🏻
100!
Thanks for these post!
Everytime I visit my local bike shop, I usually seem to know more than the guys that run the small shops and the big industrial shops/bike stores always try to talk over my head and tell me why my bicycle is obsolete,..
I do my own research and find that a lot of those guys that wear fancy hats in almost all those major places with all the latest gear are ONLY interested in selling me a bill of goods!
THANKS!
I got my first 1×11 set up 2 years ago on a Stumpjumper and am going to change it out to 2×10. My only two issues are that I need a wider gear range and that the parts wear out to quickly for my taste. Enjoyed the video.
What cassette and chainring ratio did you have?
I'm currently on a 2x9 and considering a 1x11 11-46 cassette with a 46 up front.
Thank you. Fantastic film and I do agree with you. I have always felt multiple chain rings on the front is better, like you say for the bigger range of gears. Another problem with x1 is big steps between gear ratios, but that will happen as you have less gears!!
Most riders go 1x as it's what the manufacturers fit them and also it's fashionable. I think another reason riders like 1x is that a huge amount of then don't know how to setup and adjust front derailleurs.
Friction Facts lab has the power loss due to crosschain tested. I don't recall the details, but their results tell at 250W loading, averagely lubed chain, typical road bike chainstay length, going every sprocket away from the perfectly aligned position, additional 0.3W vanishes.
do you have a link?
www.friction-facts.com/
I would think that the friction would be non-linear but good to hear that it is quite low as I expected.
each sprocket 0.3w but, in a 50 big ring at 90 RPM means 75 sprockets/second, which timed 0.3 is 4.5W lost, which is not so quite low
so would be less on mountain bikes since chainstay tends to be longer.
For cyclocross and gravel racing i had way more dropped chains with 2x. In fact most CX racers used a chain keeper to prevent chain drops, which could happen on a front ring downshift or just when coasting over rough terrain.
Completely agree used to race a 2x for cx and I would drop almost every race. Completely sucked
I love my 1x10, the chain isn’t excessively long and doesn’t fall off every time I go off a rock or log. Obviously new derailleurs have a clutch to deal with that problem, so maybe they would work on a 2x the same way. Either way I don’t need three different levers on my bar for the dropper post and front shifter. My old trek fuel 24sp was a nightmare when it came to shifting and keeping the chain on descents. I would never go back
A front derailleur is useful when cadence matters or when touring with heavy loads and lots of hills or varying terrain: for 90% of the rest of us, a 1x presents a minimal drop in efficiency in exchange for less hassle and a small reduction in weight - just remember to check your chain regularly. However, you might find your drivetrain showing wear much more quickly. In the absence of ‘missing’ gears, you may end up putting down more power in order to compensate, putting more strain on the system. Chains last longer on a well-set-up 2x / 3x system.
Great to see someone talking sense and not being blinded by new tech that might not be all its hyped up to be..well done
He don't use the sram crank, that's the real problem. Also thats bike don't be designen for 1x
@@hansvelazquez3119 always excuses...i think if they point on your face bird poo ...you still ignore that truth ...there is always those people out there . LOL
I can never think of a time I’ve had to back peddle several revolutions, also do your front chain rings have the correct offset?
So the main problem with 1x system is cross chain. It hampers performance on the lowest & highest gear. It also wear down the components quicker. More reason for me to keep my 48T XT 3x.
Gear drop while padelling backwards is not because of "chain line". Used to have a 3x10 with a 11-38. I know it is not okay, but even at the worst chainline (biggest in the front and at the end too), it never ever dropped, even though it is a lot worse compared to a 1by. 1by was perfect with a 11-38 casette. Then I put on a 11-42 casette, and it dropped from the 42-40 cogs. Chain drop is caused by the fact that your rear derailleur has a capacity for the biggest cog. If you put on a casette with bigger cogs than the capacity of your rear d., itll drop. You can buy hanger extenders online (forget LBSs) and it will give the rear derailleur extra 4 teeth capacity.
Cheers
TOTALLY AGREE! I had a 1x setup and had to switch from 32x42 to 26x42 for a nice easy low gear and I'd spin out at around 19-20 mph max.
Do you think that maybe havung a 38t round/ oval could help with that?
Thanks for sharing your findings. Maybe some of the points also need to be distiguished as to going to a 1x standard range (say up to 36t) or 1x wide range (anything over 36t ie 40 - 50t), as the wide range setup creates it's own additional problems over sticking with standard cassettes, chainline/chainangle, lower RG pulley etc
May I add a few of my findings?
a) - / + Chainline
The chainline in the low gears on bikes that were not specifically made to be compatible with wide range 1x drivetrains is horrible and will cause problems like noise due to chain angle and dropping the chain when backpedalling. HOWEVER, there are manufacturers that have addressed this issue and have adjusted their current frame designs to suit 1x drivetrains. I believe Cannondale have done this with their asymetric rear end which is why your CD is working quite well. LITEVILLE have also developed their free to all manufacturers EVO6 rear dropout standard (hopefully more will pick it up) which is based on BOOST but adjusts the chainline to work better with 1x drivetrains.
b) - dirt and grit on the front ring
Dirt and grit on a wide narrow ring causes horrible grinding noises and acceplerated chain and ring wear due to the tighter fit. This causes rings to wear quicker, and in winter and makes riding less enjoyable.
c) + cleaning
Cleaning the front ring from grit and dirt is a reason why I love 1x drivetrain. it is so simple to engage the RD (SRAM), pop the chain off and clean the front ring, this was always a pain with 2x and 3x drivetrains.
d) - / + range
Of course with a 1x drivetrian you lose range. For some it is a problem for some it is not, everyone needs to decide for themselves. I personally am looking forward to trying 1x12 with larger range. The issue I see though, and again this needs to be decided individually, is how far the derailleur pulley drops down. It amost touches the rim!
e) -/+ Clutch
Many people don't realise the clutch mechanism wears and at some point the clutch actually no longer serves it's purpose without an adjustment of the friction it provides. It happened to me. X01 drivetrain worked a treat until 6 months down the track: race run after having no problems in training. Chain dropped off. I later learned my clutch had worn and needed adjusting to work again. A 1x drivetrain without a working clutch will drop chains.
a) - bearing wear cassette
The inner bearings of freewheelbody are usually made to withstand the torque from the cassette with a standard cassette. Many freewheelbodies are not yet adapted to the higher torque that wide range cassettes provide and you'll just distroy the internals in a quick time. Some manufacturers have upgrade kits available so that you don't distroy the internals. Just something to bear in mind many people would overlook when upgrading to 1x.
Cheers!
With the 1x12 with range of 10 to 50 teeth there is still a range problem becouse the gap between the gears is very big, so you still have to compromise for these.
What you say as the last point is plain wrong I think, since your max speed is much lower with a 1x groupset, the maximum power put on the cassette is also lower (no the power you produce, but the mechanical power brought over by the chain), so actually the new cassettes are better for the freehub (if used as 1x setup as intended), but even if not so, the Tork a amateur can produce is still nothing in comparison with a pro, so the bike will probably handle it well.
To get a good chain line when upgrading you should also look at the offset in the front, to get it aligned nicely, or as nice as you can get for the reasons mentioned in this video.
The big thing is that manufacturers are starting to make bikes specifically for 1x drive-trains. They include shorter chain-stays, which helps with cross-chaining and other issues mentioned. additionally a lot of 1x systems built from random parts won't match up. If you get a bike that is built for 1x, with a 1x drive-train with components that are actually meant for each other, issues are minimal. Look at the engineering in XX1 Eagle. That's a system that is meant to work and does so near seamlessly.
There has been a lot of shit coming out of the bike industry for about 5 years now. First press-shit bottom brackets, cable pull disc brakes on road bikes and now this nonsense. Really glad you uploaded this.
Oh, I didn't really mean to prove, that one-by systems are crap, but as always I share my honest opinion about pros AND cons.
I race enduro ... and you can say what you want but no issues with 1 by and you never see 2x
Because it's basically endurance light-DH and has very specialized bikes only really meant for that one thing. They're hardly good all round bikes after all. Maybe "all round bike park bikes" since you may be able to get a shuttle or a lift back up again. They're horrific bikes for actually *riding* like 99% (probably more tbh) of the people on the planet do.
When you've got very set types of terrain and you know them ahead of time you can (if you're a bit handy and not too poor) set up gears for that exact ride.
Try timing the uphills as well and see how awesome your setup is. It's a "bike park sport" ffs, and doesn't really translate well to any other type of riding.. Besides possibly DH which is pretty similar in the way it's set up. It's like taking a ski lift to the top during winter and arguing against other skiers outside of "parks" wanting decent books to walk in.
It is a compromise alright... BUT - how often are you in the most extreme (either way) cogs, how often do you spin backwards as madman?
Good video though...
Exactly, I do speed a lot, so I miss some additional gears.
I have just started building my 1x10 bike (onone 45650b) and hope it is going to turn out as I expect...
There are many factors to consider so thanks for the video! 😉
Martin Blass. chain line is is very important. set it up so your front chain ring is inline with middle of your cassette,
Actually, you want the chain ring to be slightly over the middle, closer to the larger sprockets. Chain crossing is minimal on big-small, it happens on big-big.
LimitedGarry we are talking 1x not 2x or 3x
I ride a 3x8 mountain bike and I have no need for a 1x drivetrain. The 3x8 system gives me plenty of gear for steep technical uphills and downhills on the road. It's a lot of fun to see a huge hill and jump down a whole bunch of gears with the front derailleur. Sorta like engaging the lo-range on a 4wd vehicle. For me, training myself to operate the bicycle better in terms of shifting a complicated drivetrain is more fun than eeking out a few more watts or few seconds on a course.
1x drivetrains make sense for someone who races and has a lot more on their mind. Not having a front shifter frees up space on the handlebars for other buttons like dropper posts or active suspension control.
But for me, a front derailleur is not that complicated, makes fun clunking noises, makes bike operation more rewarding, and as a non-racer, who cares about a few extra grams.
2x has several advantages, especially if you suddenly need a lower gear. Having to get the rear derailleur to climb up the cassette when you're already in trouble is hard and potentially damaging.
Another thing with the chain drop is the front derailed helps put the chain back on the ring. It must be a pain getting the chain back on without one.
now they buy a chain catcher - just a waste
It can be, but sometimes all you have to do is adjust the front derailleur and pedal.
it's opposite, very easy to put it back since FD is not in the way
If you got a proper chain guide, it's not a issue.
Josh Lindsay, if set up correctly it is not a pain at all. Infact i have had more problems with a front derailleur from the chain catching and getting stuck on very rough terrain
Cross-chaining losses on your biggest cog are somewhat (largely) ameliorated by the fact that bigger gears are more efficienct than smaller gear combos. But there are still losses. For example, 53-28 vs 39-21...similar gear ratio, bigger gears in for the former but it's cross-chained. In that case you're talking about ~7.75 watts of friction vs ~7 watts of friction. So it's definitely a measurable difference but probably not meaningful to most. Definitely the frictional loss would measure in the milliwatts in most cross-chain scenarios, at least vs the realistic alternative which isn't perfectly aligned either.
I should add that the real cross-chain concern in 1x setups is not on the bigger cog because, again, bigger gears are more efficient & that ameliorates the cross-chain inefficiency to some extent. BUT if you pick a chain line that cross-chains on your smallest cog you have some real inefficiency when you're in the 11. (again, smaller gear, less efficient) For example, 53-15 vs 39-11...pretty much same gear ratio but the 53-15 combo generates something like 7 watts of frictional loss while the 39-11 combo generates closer to 10 watts. So if you pick a chainline to optimize your largest cog cross-chain...you'll get dropped in the flats. You're much better off picking a chainline to optimize your 11 cog or closer to the 11 clog at least.
Where are you getting your 7vs10W figures. Please give a link to the data. thanks
How do you figure that 3 watts is going to get you dropped in the flats? Riding on the hoods at 20-25 MPH means you're expending 200-400 watts. So that's about .75 to 1.5 percent-not enough to matter in any practical sense, unless you're a pro racing for several hours or days.
See the Friction Facts site mentioned above.
I have about 20 years old MTB. Really old school one. What I love about front derailleur is that if I ride on flat, leveled surface and there is short uphill part all I do is drop one step on front chainring, pedal up that short hill and when back on leveled road just go back on bigger one in front and thats is. So it takes only one shift down and then one shift up. If I would want do that on rear casette, I'd have to shift about three steps up and then three steps down again for the same effect. I am really a casual cyclist and there is still original chain and all drivetrain on that bike after 20 years.
all 1x setups can achieve the same thing with a longer throw of the shifter lever. Single click, one gear change, longer throw shifts multiple gears.
The dropdown chain problem occurs because you are doing conversions that are not design for. Its only a matter of calculating the chainline and deisgning frames and cranks perfect aligned.
Great video! I just started riding this summer and got a mid-level XC bike with 3x and as a newbie I of course wondered why all of these 1x was thought of as the best. Mainly actually because of some of your problems - mainly 3 and 4 (and now two other things to think of). I have been using all gears in the 3x (although seldom the smallest one), and since I'm still quite physically unfit (fat) I'll keep it that way until I really have to upgrade or buy a new bike in which case I think a 2x will be the best for me. Also - as a new subscriber, thanks for many other great videos!
It comes down to installing what makes you happy. I went from a Shimano 2x10 to a 1x10 using a sun race 11-42 cassette and an oval 32t chainring. I'm happy with the change and have no back pedaling issues, and feel that there are fewer parts on the bike to malfunction. I chose to spend money and I'm happy, what's not to love?
I agree that simplicity and finding what works best for an individual rider should be the goal. I commute on pavement, so an 11-speed 11-46 cassette paired with a 42-tooth chainring fits my needs.
I also don't know if this helps anyone else, but my auto insurance agent knows how much I ride (I work with her husband) so she was able to get an auto insurance discount for me.
Something I wish had emphasis, is that YOUR CHAINLINE can be adjusted with washers/spacers. If your m8 crank to chainring bolts aren't long enough to accommodate the distance you need, check for clearance issues and USE A NORMAL NUT AND BOLT!!
It makes sense simply because a chain will need to move in like 10-12 different angles so it would put more wear. I have a 1x10 Marin Rock Spring 2 hard tail mountain bike and I have not experienced any shifting issues (Deore) at all as it is so buttery smooth. Never chain dropped and never crunchy grinds at all. Before I purchased the bike, I thought that it would be little bit slow but I was surprised how fast I could go. I hit 30mph on it with its thick knobby tires on the road. I don't see myself needing to go any faster than that or near that especially on mountain bike trails. I climb very well too. I do like the user simplicity of a 1x drivetrain and also the reduced weight from not having another crank, another derailleur and another shifter and cables. Everybody tries to find ways to reduce weight. Do I think the 2x can go faster and has more various useful speeds? Sure.... Price is also a big factor too and I was able to get my bike for an awesome sale price and the 1x likely helped lower the price vs a more expensive 2x with additional parts.
I went with 1x because I am in the big ring all the time. Even though rear cassette is 12-25 I am still able to climb hills with minimal effort. I don't mind 2x though. 3x seems to be a bit redundant with gear ratios unless the bike is really heavy.
Same here. Always ride on the big ring. I almost never shift to the smaller one. So I don’t miss not having it and love the simplicity and aesthetics of the 1x.
Btw, I love your channel. Best content- esp the bike mechanic stuff. Please do more bike repair tutorials and riding tutorials ! Incorporate e- mtbs too, perfection!!
I converted my Shimano 105 road bike to a 1 by 8 drivetrain flat bar bike. I replaced the 50/34 crank with a 44 teeth crank , wich is almost in the middle of 50/34. Luckiliy I did not have to adjust the chain line. In order to not loose the chance to maintain the optimal cadence (80-90-100 rpm) I have chosen the proper cassette for it, and everything works just fine so far. I can't hear any bad noise from the rear also. I think if people dont forget the chain maintenance then such a drivetrain should work just as smooth as a 2 by 10 or 11. And if You stick with a 3/32 chain (5 to 8 speed systems) the chain or cassette wear is not an issue since they're much much cheaper than the 9-11 chains and cassettes.
I use a 1X system on an old 1996 road bike. Only seven gears with 38T front and 12-32T rear and it works quite well for me as a slow casual rider. Chain cross over is not very extreme with only 7 gears and I don't get chain drop with a front narrow wide chain-ring and not much chain slack on the highest gear. The derailleur is an old 1996 Shimano meant for a 2X setup but works fine.
There are more than 4 problems with 1x anything:
1. chain does not like to travel by side/diagonaly, and when it goes it wears teeths by side, wears itself by uneven load on pins of chain, front ring gear is more loaded on left side in touching point of chain for low gears and more loaded on right side on higher gears ( so more powerloss, noise and wear of components)
2. to ensure high range of gear ratios, rear derailleur is more loaded by chain tension on lower gears so here is more powerloss, noise and wear( pulley of derailleur are more loaded and in some cases upper pulley can touch teeths of first gear)( my 1995. dura ace metal pulley lasts 60000 km)
3. gear rings will live longer if for same conditions are used ring gears with more teehts( for ex: 22/18 has same gear ratio as 32/26 so if is not to much chain diagonal is better to use 32/26 than 22/18, for 2/3x systems
4. if chain falls from front gear ring , it has to be set by hands( no front derailleur)
5. there is only 1 gear ring for same gear ratios/speed so some gear rings will be worn faster because are more in use ( for 3x 8/9/.. rings can be combinated for same ratio)
Summary : manufacturers offer worse option that will last shorter and they will earn more money ( on naive people)
Makan Tahi How many years have you used a single chain ring? I can tell you for the vast majority of people they run just fine. Been running mine for years without any of these problems.
when i was in competition i drove ultegra on front 39/53 and 21/12 ,8 speed on rear, and because ratios i used mostli 39 and 21/19/17/16, and that front 39 lived for 3 years max,( 50000km) chain was regularly oiled, cleaned and changed every 2000 km (hg90), on every chain change 39 ring was rotated for 1 hole on crank, now i have same 39/53 and on rear bigger rings: 26/22/ 18/17/16/15/14/13 and now i mostly use 53-18/17 and 53 rings has little signs of wear after more than 10 years.
i works in bike repair shop and i noticed that even on more expensive bikes, owners do not care about chain/ring lubrication, cleaning and wear
I love 26 inch tires. Theyre so damn responsive and reactive for city. How tall are you? That seat would need a step to get. Maybe I'm short. I dont know. I'm 5' 11
Not seen this mentioned yet but one of the biggest factors for me is that moment when you're busy enjoying the blast down, turn 90' and suddenly shiiiiiit you're facing a near-vertical wall! You can't always read these things* and being able to dump from 36 to 22t (or 42 to 27t or whatever) in less than half a pedal stroke is more use than needing to skip across half a dozen or more sprockets at the back.
*see 'blasting downhill without a care in the world' ;-)
I changed from a 2x10 to a 1x10 and have not had a single chain loss since whereas before it was always a possibility.
Also, quieter, still have enough range, will never go back.
Thanks for this great review. The biking industry is trying to get us to become "use and throw away" consumers, which, in some ways, goes against the grain and sprite of free, ecological, nature loving and fun MT Biking. I really enjoyed this review. You could do a new reviews on the many new BB standards and the "boost" hub spacing etc.... please.
Been running 1x since 2007, 1x9 to 1x11 and don't have any of the problems mentioned here.
I don't do much of extended climbs and spend most of the time pedaling in 13t to 36t range so don't do much cross chaining.
If I lived in Colorado front range 1x may not be my setup, but it works for me just fine for Mid Atlantic area.
Both my road bikes were switched to 1x10's. The reason is if you live in a windy area, with no climbs, no mountains for hundreds of km's there is no reason to use 2 rings. In windy areas you will be cross chaining naturally but with 2 rings you will be badly cross chaining. I use a 47X10 setup for ring and cassette. For windy areas on the flats it is useless to use 2 rings.
I asked my local bike shop about 15 years ago. Did any body do a 1 x 10? and he laughed his head off, never gonna happen he said! I was disappointed as I was always getting shifting problems on my 3x9mtb. Recently I bought a bike with 1 x 11 shifting and for me it's a much more enjoyable experience.
you have 4 problems for 1x but all your bike are 1x wtf?
He showed a bike that had a 3x drive train
@@nemezote I also assumed all those bikes were his...and wondered why he would have no front derailers on all his bikes. He doesn't really make it clear that those bike don't belong to him.
@@nemezote lol from the needlessly aggressive tone, I can tell that you need to get laid
Actually those are not "clients" bikes but the ones that he is/was riding. Shaibike has more then 4 bikes here and they are also 2x or 3x, just check other videos.
I don't care what anyone says. I love my 1x setup so much more than the 2 and 3x I had before. There is no going back for me. I do ride with a lot of people that feel the same and many also disagree. To each their own.
I have a 1x11, I do notice I seem to run out of gears very quickly. I don't have an issue with the backwards pedal to date, but I do wish I had a second chainring upfront. The first two gears are way to low and I've never used them. I'm gonna change the front (38t) to a 42t gear. I can hear the chain in almost every gear, and it's a factory setup so the chain is got a pretty good line, but the range of a 1x10, 11 or 12 is too much for the chainline to effectively handle. It amazes me that the bike industry, as a whole, says for years that bad chain angles can cause issues and then sells us a drivetrain that promotes bad chain angles right out of the box. So much for marketing, I think the whole bike industry is just selling what they make now and saying that's the best.
A perfect example is that Lefty you have, I can understand the benefits of it easy enough, but it was tried back in the 80's or 90's and didn't sell then either, it was/is just too different for people to accept, but now it being advertised as "new" and "innovative" idea, when in fact it's over 40 years old. They run on the fact that people who will remember stuff are old enough not to care or are dead, so they can advertise an old idea as new. Kinda like electric cars that have been around for over 100 years, when in reality batteries and motors have changed, not the idea.
I'm a bit bias because I really like my xx1 set up, but some of these problems are really nit-picking in my opinion.
First Issue- it's rare that you spin backwards for more than half a stroke which is almost never enough to throw the chain off
Second- The wattage loss is really so minimal, none of us are pushing 800 watts for more than a couple seconds so even if you lose 5 watts it's not statistically relevant, would equate to fractions of a section each ride
Third- Sram has better gear range than shimano and if you can push 800 watts you can push a 34t chainring uphill. In terms of cadence I've always found its dictated by the trail more than your gears
Fourth- maintenance is an issue but at least each time you replace a cassette all the gears are roughly equally worn whereas there are overlap gear combinations on 2/3by that mean some cogs see little use
Cost is definitely high, but the way I look at it is when it comes time to replace components, it's gonna cost about the same as a similar spec 2by and I think it's a better option. Also, I've dropped a chain once in the last year and a half on my 1by or there's the ever effective 30 gram chain guide if you're paranoid
You proved some of my suspitions of 1x's - Subscribed!!
The two chain drops has more to do with the tension of the rear derailleur and the clutch adjustment.
Also keep in mind, SRAM and Shimano didn't design their 1X systems with Cannondale's chainring in mind.
Also what adjustment do you have in the chainline with a BB30 bottom bracket. So yeah, the C'dale may have been optimized for a 2X system, but that is due to the specific bike design...and once again, SRAM/Shimano didn't design their 1X systems with that C'dale in mind. They have to design their systems to fit a plethora of bike types and brands. If companies aren't designing their bike around these drivetrain systems, that's on them.
As for the gearing of the trail bike. In all reality, they are not really designed to hit those super fast AND SMOOTH descents that you're doing 40+km/h......as weird as that sounds. They're designed to descent more technical terrain FASTER than your C'dale hardtail. There is a threshold in which speed is no longer useful on those bikes because you're either going to hit a jump that is outside the bikes capacity or too rough for the suspension to actually keep up and allow you to remain in control. Your test is outside the scope for what the bike was designed for. You get that Canyon in it's native environment....twisty, rocky, technical, loose, rooty, drops, step-ups, step-downs and you'll see yourself using every bit of that suspension, every bit of the gearing, and it will blow that weight-weenie FSi away. They're two different bikes with two different focuses in mind, and different gearing to match.
To sort the chain line add chainring spacers to move the chainring into the centre of where your x2 or X3 was.
Thanks for these opinions - I liked the 3x7 setup on my entry-level MTB 10 years ago. The gear ratios & range were already optimised, and the outer plastic chain guard at the front would prevent the rider's leg contacting the greasy chain, and also helped stopped the chain falling off to the outside (better it jammed in the gap between the large chainring and the plastic guard, perhaps). Good practice as well for the mind, to operate both derailleurs all the time!
I'm so happy to hear you bring this up. I recently bought a new full suspension bike and made sure it had 2x10 system. One thing I find which is never discussed is street riding, which I do a lot of, I use my lower ring about 30% of the time. This is significant. Basically the math does not work for me. 2x10 is better than 1x12. The wright savings aren't big enough(that huge 12 ring has to weigh a lot). The loss of the front gear mech means nothing to me(I like symmetry). And I love my cadence!
agreed, i think it also has to do with all the other clickers / accessories that can be bought. Seat Dropper, Suspension lockouts, Tyre blow canisters, e-power drives etc. I thought maybe adding hub gear system to a 1by would be only reason to change, then have 3 or 4 times 11 system
I support your bang for the buck philosophy. People who ride a lot all see this except for the weekend warriors.
I went from a 3x8 to a 1x10 simply because I got wider tires 2.4 and the front mech would rub on rear tire the other deciding factor was I was always sat in the middle chainring on the 3x so making that choice was good for me and absolutely love my 1x setup the cockpit looks so much more to tidy without so much clutter and having the front mech removed makes it easier to clean round that area which was always tricky with the 3x
The first two problems could be fixed by running a bigger offset chain ring (running a non boost chain ring on a boost bike). But yeah 1X is really an enduro thing that has been trickled down. XC probably should have stayed 2x but the industry tends to follow gravity trends (thru axle, boost, dropper post). Ix is good for gravity less likely to drop a chain down onto the smaller front chain ring as there isn't one and you can run a wide narrow which won't drop a chain as easily (and gravity doesn't need the choice or efficiency that XC does). For me 1X is way better and the 2x derailleur used to let the chain fall off anyway, its not a substitute for a chain guide in my experience.
Though I do think 11 speed and 12 speed are stupid, we end up with very skinny chains and super fiddly derailleur indexing (a small bump of the rear derailleur will wreck the shifting) as the gears get closer together. The chains, cassettes and chain rings wear faster and are weaker. All I want is the range of eagle on a 1x9 or 1x10, way more reliable, stronger and way easier to setup. I don't need the choice of gears, us gravity riders have strong legs :D
That backpedaling and chain dropping would be HUGE for me offroad. I did that ALL the time. The only relevant argument for 1-by seems to be that it's easier to shift. Really? Who struggles with shifting? Show me one person. I would counter it by having to gearshift LESS if you have 2 or 3 front chainrings. Since you can drop the chain down by one on the front chainring instead of shifting with rear derailleur 5 times. 1 press vs 5, which is easier?
Companies have to make stuff incompatible and poor quality. Otherwise no one would buy anything. If bikes lasted for 20 years, how long b4 a company has sold all the bikes possible? And theres 20+ companies making bikes, right? Would it take a year? 2 years? To make a billion or so bikes. They make stuff incompatible so you would be inclined to upgrade. And make it look like it's different. Just different enough. I don't trust anyone who starts a sentence with "We have all this new technology and therefor...". Metal is metal, carbon is carbon. The bike has looked the same pretty much since 1885. Quick release was invented in 1927!
Ooh, aerodynamics of bike was increased by 2% compared to last generation. And the bike is at most 20% of the drag factor. so 2% of 20% = ....0.4%? Wow, much impressed, such innovation!
Is it easier to move chain 1 step up or down on the front ring (1 button press)
OR
hold and press gearshifter til you find the right gear, going up or down approx. 5 gears in the rear? What is that? Pumping shiftlever twice? And counting how many shifts that was?
I would choose option number one.
Obviously you don't go over rough terrain. With 1X system, it allows you to run a narrow wide, and a chain guide which great stops chain drops. With 2X and 3X you can't do this, and the front mech is so inefficient at shifting as you have to back of the power a little to change.
Your logic is ridiculous. Penicillin was discovered in 1928 and do you think we still use the same exact drug today? No! The basis is the same but over the years it has been improved. The Ford model T was made in 1908. Do we still drive it or use the same technology today? No! The basis is the same but over the years it had been improved. more RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT has concluded with today's cars being very safe and efficient. Therefore saying that the bike is the same is very ignorant of you. And if you start talking about a 2% increase compared to last generation, over 10 years that equals 20%. And that is a big difference. In the Olympics do you see the 100 metre time get broken by a whole second? No, every 10 years of so it is broken only by a little bit. Do you understand how ridiculous you sound.
Well, someones pissed off...Good.
You are comparing machines to humans with the Olympics stuff.
Are you still driving a Ford Model T? Are those for sell? Because quick releases are.
Do you understand how bacteria work? They mutate every 20 minutes or so. Of course the same penicillin wont work for long, same with antibiotics. So the medical field HAS TO create a better version, one that bacteria can't circumvent. A bike doesn't rust and fall to bits if theres no innovation.
2% of 20% is still 0.4%. So in your argument that would total 4% over 10 years. Bike manufacturers don't necessarily release new gens every year. Not with aero improvements.
Why do we still sit in the same position? Why aren't racing bikes more like recumbents? Or a bike where you sit like superman? Wouldn't that halve the aerodrag? Since we would be twice as low.
That's exactly how bicycle land speed records are set... in recumbents. They aren't allowed in the peloton by the UCI for other reasons, no-one would argue that recumbent bikes aren't aero dreamboats.
I probably never going get a 1x again. I will only use 2x. I spent 5 months on the Andes with 1x11 on 27.5x3”. That was a big mistake in my part to ave brought this bike. I’m going back to finish my trip with 2x10.
Is it difficult.to climb with a 1by than a 2by
I totally agree with your arguments. Last year I needed to get a new AM MTB and found most bikes having either this big 1× nonsens or at least 2× . I'm pretty sure in a couple of years when most of us are annoyed by this 1× hype, the bike industry will come with something totally new and revolutinary: Brand new hot 3×13 drivetrain. For my part, luckily I got one of the rare 3×11 equipped Bikes (Centurion Numinis 2000.27 2016) with Shimano Deore-XT (M8000 series). Year, this thing really rocks as well on the steepest uphills as on fast trails or downhills. It has simply none of the disadvantages you mentionned. XT 3×11 is still available with a FC-M8000-3 crankset.
I have a 1x9 cyclecross bike, and I understand some of the issues that you're pointing out. However if you find yourself running out of gears, why don't you go with a bigger chainring up front? My 1x has a 38t chainring, which is a good ratio for speed and cadence on the flats. It's also provides me work great speed on the decent as well.
I wonder what technical climbs would induce a back pedaling issue?
I've spent 6 days in Zona Zero, Spain and like 20 enduro rides. Had zero (haha) problems with chanin drop... Quite a bit of technical climbing there :D So I call firm BS on the first point! BTW, my shimano 1x11 bacpedalls fine unlike in the video, which ofcourse is not a use case.
Also zero chain drops without any chain device on EWS grade descends.
The TRUTH is not just problems!
Tamas Strezi what bike is your 1x11 my '16 trance w/shamano will drop two gears from low if I have to back pedal on a tech climb like avoiding a rock with pedal fkn sucks
Specialized Epic Comp 29er with a fresh, full 1x11 XT build(not a conversion from 2, 3x!)
your're right Tamas, I call BS too! To demonstrate the chain coming off, he had to back pedal very fast and for quite a few strokes. Unless your doing a fakie, no-one will backpedal that much
if you put 11 speed cassette on a 10 speed freehub the cassette will be too far inwards, just few millimetres make a huge difference,front ring position too, I got a cinch ring so I got no issues.
Feel like you'd drop more chains getting into situations where you have to shift the front ring on climbs than you would from having a 1x. Even if all the problems he was talking about were true, I'd still take the 1x every time because I don't have to do any huge front ring shifts.
Go get a 3x with 26" wheels and cantilever brakes. I heard they are awesome 🤓
testing316 controltech jimi stop or TRP cr950 cantis are some of the lightest brakes available. People still use them.
testing316 controltech jimi stop or TRP cr950 cantis are some of the lightest brakes available. People still use them.
I already have... and you are right...it's still awesome.
sorry, i will NEVER return to rimbrakes (too much tinkering required)
nor 26" wheels.(29 is just faster more comfortable and generally less tiring on the trails in my area which are not that technical)
That said i still use the traditional 2 or 3 front blades.
Already did, buddy. XTR M900 brakes and rock solid 7 speed XT RD-M739 derrailleur coupled to Sram Gripshift X-Ray shifters. What a sweet ride....but it`s ok, modern stuff is acceptable too, Newbie ^_^
Has any manufacturer ever tried a setup where instead of the derailleur moving the chain to another ring, the entire cassette moves left/right? 🤔
That way, you would never have to cross your chain. I can see that this might be mechanically complicated and lead to a much larger cassette, though.
antred11 You would need a massive rear hub. Not really feasible. A sliding chainring on the other hand is a little bit more feasible.
Chain dropping on back pedalling usually has a lot do with chain stay length, its also worth considering chainline and whether it needs a spacer to adjust. Generally not a problem as the most you need to back pedal is 3/4 of a turn.
Excellent video showing a few unknown problems at least to me, I never knew of the chain misalignment associated with the single and sure don't like the idea of the chain being jammed-- I have a 2016 Focus Raven max SL with XTR double and I wanted the double for better gear selection
You know as with almost anything there is an opposite reaction to a reaction meaning possibly solve one problem and create another---
Again great vid
This guy is completely right, this is why i`d much rather use my old 7x3 vintage mtb or my 6x2 1983 road bike. On the road bike, cross-chaining is basically non-existent, the original drivetrain lasts forever. Meanwhile, the new 9/10x3 drivetrains need replacing every 4 years, which isn`t exactly cheap. The industry is going backwards while telling people what an improvement the new stuff is. Most costumers are fools anyway.
Eh? I've been using my 3x9 drivetrain for 10 years, and it has never come close to needing replacing.
Amen, preach it! Crosschain is an issue with 1x drivetrain. Also 2x gives you the option to run the front crank for one gear up hill and one gear down hill rather than throw the shift lever six times in the rear with a 1x (why does nobody think like that???)
The problem with the 1x systems is the cassette mass. Try pedaling fast in the 40T x 11T, then stop pedaling and begin a 5 degree back pedaling. The chain will jump off the 11T cog as the cassette inertia overrides the chain tooth engagement.
Very well balanced arguments! Well worth the watch-time. Even though I personally still prefer 1-by and hadn't had that much issues. Probably because i prefere more technical, and thus slower decends - combined with rather pushing/carrying the bike on steeper/more technical ascends.
1x8 with 32 x 10-32 is sufficient...
"Pedal Dammit!!!"
lol I genuinely used that a while ago
Well, I have a 2x11 Shimano and an 1x12 GX Eagle, and I would never go back to a derailleur. With the 1x I never lost a chain, while I already crashed multiple times because of loosing the chain on the 2x drivetrain and stepping full power into the emptiness. The range of both is almost the same and you can clearly see that the Shimano casette wore down pretty fast while the SRAM cassette still looks okay.
The thing that makes me laugh the most is the 1X improving chain drop... but the shills keep pushing the sales-talk. The problem is that the industry combines equipment in entry-level line-ups: often you can't have a decent front fork, shifters or brakes if you choose a 2X to avoid issues. At a distance, this creates a second joke : two chain rings cost less than a single...
I ride enduro 2x10 drivetrain, love it. Had 1x10 in the past, 2x10 preferred.
Im a 1x guy.
I rode 3×10 shimano slx for 2 years now.
Last week I replaced my my old 3× m612 crankset with a 30 tooth raceface affect crank.
And after one week I can already tell, its a hell of a difference.
1. Its 550g lighter
2. I never had a chaindrop and I have zero problems with backpedaling.
3. The narrowwide chainring does not even need a chainguide
4. Its quiet now. The old shimano front derallieur produced a hell of a noise which was ultra annoying.
5. It looks so clean.
6. I have now less gearratio (11-36) but it works for me (iam more the freerider , iam not racing)
#1 advantage of the 1x drivetrains is the narrow-wide chainring. The chain basically never falls off, which is why it n1 choice for MTB.
For road i would definitely choose something that gets up to 60 front and 9 rear, for maximum speed. 2x11 drivetrain
Current bikes - cross country mtb fully 2x,10 touring bike 3x10, emtb 1x11. Tested a BMC gravel 1x 11, found it to be really great for general riding here in the Alps. Seriously considering a 1x 12 for the SRAM 38 x 52 low gear... I'm not racing...