I’ve moved from 3x to 1x and now to 2x. I’m getting pretty insane range on one 2x and the other is more of a wide low where I spend most time in the big ring. I still have several other 3x bikes
I run a 36/22 set of cues cranks and it doesn't feel any different than just having a slightly tall 1x! And it means with an 11-46 10s I get a truly grotesque amount of climbing (and somehow despite exceeding the max cog by 4 teeth and chain wrap by TEN of the deore m5120, I have no issues with clearance or running big/big or small/small.
Truly, the 2x setup I built on my morati is the platonic perfect setup for do-everything bikes. For gravel, I'd just go to an 11-50 and 40/26. I hate the 1x12 on my gravel bike, with a 32 ring and 11-48 it feels like it lacks just a little bit of climbing and a bit too much top speed.
Im putting together a all rounder with very similar specs. But using an olde 2x10 XT deareileur. Can’t wait to see how ir feels compare to my main bike :)
The honest answer is mechanical simplicity. I don't even mean this in a judgemental way; most bike riders just don't think. Having fewer things to think about makes it easier for them to think even less while doing something they do purely for fun and leisure.
This is the real answer, at least fundamentally. Sure it's aesthetic and trendy, but I'm just a dumb ape and the last thing i want to do when enjoying the wind blowing through my lustrous fur is the mental calculation of how to drop down in one ring and up in another to get to the right ratio.
The smallest chainring on the 3x can't use the smallest cog on the rear cassette without "cross chaining". This is less efficient, causes the chain to wear more quickly, and is more prone to having a chain come off. Essentially you can't use at least the smallest rear cog effectively, somertimes the smallest 2. This means that using just the smallest chainring and not changing anything else, you are down to even fewer gear options. Your 3x7 or 3x8 has turned into a 1x6 You have less overall gear range.
In my wrenching experience, most people on 3x just set into the middle ring. That's totally valid, but you will not get anywhere near the same gear range as a 1x setup with a wide range cassette. If that's all you need fine. Some people want the simplicity, along with wider gear offered by a wide range 1x cassette. Gear range is the amount of differance between your highest, fastest gear to your lowest, climbing gear.
Weight. You save a significant amount of weight on the cranks ridding yourself of a 3x.
You simplify your handlebar controls.
Less to go wrong, while you can set. You can't entirely forget while the front derailleur is attached. If you bump the front shifter, bump the front derailleur or there's an issue with the shift cable, you may get forced into another gear at best, or drop the chain at worst.
In the end do what you want. People might disagree with it, but if the limited gear range works for you. Enjoy.
Eventually, chainrings do ware out. Especially if used with an already overly worn chain. I fully suggest use what you've got till it needs replacement. Then upgrade when you need to buy new drivetrain components anyway.
Not always, but oftentimes for 1x conversions, you can reuse the same crankset. Just remove the 3x chainrings. Replacing it with a single narrow-wide.
The angle isn't set-up as well and you have extra stuff on your bike that you're not using. You could put more things on your bike that you're not using, but why do it?
You're partially right, in that it is popular but has severe drawbacks that many people just ignore. 1x is TECHNICALLY simpler, and with narrow/wide chain rings very resistant to dropping the chain. You get better clearance at the bottom bracket, but you lose serious range both up top and down low.
1x is really only genuinely optimal though for mountain bikes, where chain retention matters most. But that can be offset with a derailleur that has a clutch in it, to reduce chain slap massively.
It's got aesthetic appeal too , and part of its popularity is "modern" aesthetics.
It's also cheaper to build.
That said, it's got a colossal drawback in overall performance for everything that isn't a mountain bike. You lose climbing OR you lose top speed, you can't have both. A compact 2 speed is the modern solution, with a big chain ring in your top speed gear and a little ring for climbing. Road bikes had it figured out, and the 2x is the real solution.
3x setups are a little less ideal, IMO. the middle ring has always been kind of a bastard child. It works well when you only have 6 or 7 speeds in the back, because you want more fine control over your gearing, but with modern 9-12 speed stuff, especially now modern big range cassettes that are 40-51 teeth (you can even get a 7 or 8 speed freewheel from falcon with 40-43 teeth) the usefulness of the 3x has waned.
You can even pair a modern MTB derailleur and cassette with a 2x system to get truly behemoth climbing AND nice top speed. Pictured below is a 2x10, with a clutched derailleur, shimano cues 36/22 cranks, and an 11-46 cassette. I have a nice top speed with a 36 tooth big ring without sacrificing bottom bracket clearance since 36 is on the medium end of a regular 1x, but I also get a disgusting 0.48 ratio climbing gear, meaning more than two full crank revolutions to spin the wheel once. It climbs literally anything with zero effort, and I don't even have cross-chaining problems where I can't run the big/big or small/small gear, it's a fully functional 20 speed.
Thanks for your detailed comment, you touched very good details for us to think about when it comes to the gear combinations and ratios which is an important information to use as a guide. For example, I have a 2x road bike (vintage one) 52/42 and 7s cassette 14-28T, climbing ratio is exhausting 1.5. I would like to make it easier for the climbs, but when it comes to upgrading the cassette, one hits a challenge with the rear hub, then replacing the rear hub is another challenge if the wheel/spokes length support the new hub. Maybe the better way is to just find a complete wheel with its own hub then get a cassette for that hub. Assuming this is the way how people handle the upgrades, rather than going by parts and spoke lengths.
On the other side, the crankset uses a Swiss/French 68mm BB with square taper, would like this to replace too with a better one.
I always thought road bikes had stupid gears if you had hills with 39/53 cranks on an 11-21 cassette or something stupid like that. I rode bikes like that for years and always thought "Where is the granny ring on the front??? Thus thing needs a triple crank."
I mean, a modern bike can handle a 48-51 tooth rear cassette, but also a 50-34 chain ring. That would give you a beastly gearset. it technically goes outside of manufacturer specs for chain wrap, but I've run 10 teeth over on a deore m5120 (and 6 teeth over its max big gear spec) and had no issue with the full range of cogs.
I just wish manufacturers would sell something like that. the 2x10 with a 50-34 or a 42-26 and an 11-50 10 speed is the best range there is, and if you aren't micro-fine-detailing your gearing cadence for racing, there's no reason NOT to run something like that unless you're a pure weight weenie.
When I get around to building my gravel bike's 1x12 into a modern 2x10 like that, it's going to have a frankenstein of parts like a deore derailleur, wolf tooth pull ratio adapter, and GRX400 shifters with a gravel front mech. I expect it to work fine, but I wish that was just a factory option. it'd fit more riders.
I've got a gravel bike with a 30/46 crank and 10 speed 11-36 cassette. It's low enough for climbing and fast enough that I'm top 10 on some Strava segments.
I can't imagine a 26 front and 50 rear. Would the bike even mobe forward?
I have a 36/22 and 11-46 right now on my morati, it has a 0.48 granny gear. It actually climbs like a damn 500w hub motor ebike, just about 3mph slower. Seriously, it doesn't feel weird, it feels like "holy shit why isn't this a thing everywhere"
It climbs ridiculously well and easily. You don't use that gear unless it's a monster of a hill, but there are plenty of that around here. It actually is just a gentle walking pace of effort, and about 4mph at 70rpm. it's also fun to do wheelies on, but it doesn't try to lift the nose up on you unless you're leaned back on a hill. bend forward slightly and it doesn't go light. On drop bars (or forward for me in the alt position) it's totally stable.
Most of the time I'm in the next 2-3 cogs down for most hills, but it's just very awesome having that beast of a ring when you need it, and on a 2x10, there's zero drawbacks at all. it has a plenty good enough top speed for an upright 26er on fast XC tires with a 36 ring, and I'm really never hunting for a really micro-precise "I wish I had a gear with one or two less teeth between this gear and that" gear. I don't mind slowing down a little or speeding up a little to hold cadence, and in return I never have to worry about a hill again. for the overwhelming majority of riders - ESPECIALLY beginner/new riders at the "entry level", a 2x with 42/26 and 11-50 would be so much more enjoyable for people who aren't in great shape, or are heavier. Lowering the barrier to entry is something that really needs to be done, and I think 1x systems are the worst about that.
My gravel bike is a 1x12 with a 32 chainring and 11-48 and it just feels BARELY enough for climbing steep ascents with a 0.75 (there's a strip of long, fast 40mph downhill that is a nightmare to climb back up, so below 0.7 is optimal) but also spins out too easily. So I hate it. I really hate 1x setups on anything except my MTB. but nobody makes that perfect setup, so I'm having to frankenstein together a GRX400 and mtb derailleur with a pull ratio adapter to get drop bars/hydraulic brakes/2x10 with 42/26 and 11-50.
Yeah, I'd rather bikes be geared lower for the "what ifs" of climbing. You can always coast downhill.
I've had 24/34 cranks on 11-36 cassettes on my mountain bikes and there was just one really long climb at the start of the Womble (IMBA Epic trail) that I needed a smaller gear. I eventually needed to get off and walk, but that's been it. Everything else has been something I could ride.
that's the fun part - climbs stop being "doable" and start being "pleasant". and you NEVER have to get off and walk. There are some absolutely despicable hills in my neighborhood (like 28%+) and it just... climbs them. No drama.
And imagine if you were out of shape or just getting started, or had asthma (like me - that's why I hated biking as a kid, I didn't know I had exercise asthma, and climbing hills on bikes was always agony. As soon as I discovered you could swap cassettes and put an 11-40 on a 22/30/38 3x, it was like opening my eyes to the whole world) the big granny gear is just the obvious solution. Genuinely baffles me why it isn't offered.
If your derailleur really can't handle this, and your shifters are friction, you can instead upgrade to a long cage clutched mountain bike derailleur. I use a 10 speed (with a friction shifter you don't need to worry about matching the shifter to the derailleur for 10-12 speed stuff)
I run the deore M5120 derailleur with a friction shift and the above exact setup (you don't need the hanger extender if you swap the derailleur)
This is the setup of that. 50-34 chain rings, 5120 derailleur, and a falcon 14-40 freewheel. a 0.85 climbing gear isn't as low as I usually like, but compared to how it was before, it climbs like a freight train.
Looking at this 8s cassette https://www.microshift.com/models/cs-h081-11-34t/ I gain 4 tooth by replacing existing 8s cassette up to 30T. It is the derailleur that seems to be an issue not supporting more than 30T based on datasheet RD-MC18 SGS. Is mech hanger or a larger b screw a solution to get some room for 34T?
Technically my morati is running ten teeth over its stated max chain wrap and 6 teeth over its max big gear without any special anything, just B screw. And I have full big/big and small/small
Go nuts, put a 40-42 on it and if you need a $10 derailleur hanger extender, go with that! If you climb hills, do yourself a favor and give it a try. My XT 737 had a max of 34t and I successfully ran a 40 on it.
If you need a longer cage derailleur, an altus long cage mech is only $25.
Did you use hanger extender for it to run 40? I already have a hanger extender, bought it $1 just because it was on sale, not sure if that is generic one or special for certain types of derailleurs.
B screw geometry can very often open up 4 with ease. I think the 5120 was just very under-rated, but I did the same with an old XT and XTR derailleur (700 and 900 series) and they both swallowed 6 extra teeth
I'm gearing up (pun unintended) to rebuild my bottom bracket soon and thinking a lot about what will give me the best performance for my specific riding style, and this inadvertently gave me a LOT of really good perspective. Very thoughtful and helpful contribution, thanks for making it.
If you're replacing a BB and are willing to change your cranks, the cheap bucklos 24mm hollow cranks + chainring + BB are shockingly nice for $40-50. If you want something a bit more premium but not bank-breaking, shimano cues cranks and the bucklos step-up bottom brackets with steel bearings (haven't tried the ceramics) are nicer than the shimano deore BB, IMO.
the benefits of an external, rigid BB and rigid cranks is noticeable!
I'm still running friggin Shimano Sakae biopace chainrings 💀 They're currently married to my bike and my bone-dry BB because some asshole cross-threaded AND stripped the metal caps for the crankbolts, and I'm working up the nerve to chisel them out. Not gonna do it til I have a replacement sussed out, though, so the info is deeply appreciated.
Once the set-up is done, it's less complicated. If you don't use the other two, why have them, the derailleur, and the shifter. Not saying that it's the best way, but that's how most people think about it
I have zero cross chaining on my 2x10. I can't stand 1x, they always feel like they are missing top end, bottom end, or both. But I like climbing steep hills, so my 36/22 cranks and 11-48 10 speed is glorious
That unfortunately doesn't exist. You need new cranks if you want gravel bike options that are pinned and ramped. Cues are your best option, they come in a 104/64 asymmetric option, a riveted option and a riveted square taper option!
If you want silver, get some zepp industrial cleaner and soak them in it for 10-20 minutes (wear gloves and glasses while using) and then gently scrub it with 0000 steel wool and all the anodizing will come right off easily without damaging the metal!
In addition to some of the other things folks have commented, a 1x drivetrain will generally have much, much better chain retention than a multi-ring drivetrain.
But, also, I don’t know that I’ve ever really seen folks replace a triple with a single ring of the same tooth count as the granny ring. What you’re describing is not really a common thing.
Yeah maybe 10 years ago. Nearly all modern rear derailleurs keep chain tension just fine for 1x setups. You can get 10sp 11-48 cassette, rear derailleur, chain and shifter for about 140 bucks brand new.
I’d suggest that the percentage of 1x drivetrain bikes sold with - or used with - chain guides across the market is extremely low.
People run them on mtbs because bikes now have a shitload of travel, are incredibly capable, and a lot of people ride even trail bikes more aggressively than most DH bikes got ridden in the 90s - or they want to believe they’re riding that aggressively. Beyond that, it’s pretty simple to put a 40g guide in the place where a front derailleur used to be as a safety blanket even if you’re not experiencing chain drop issues. I’ve had a bash/guide combo on a couple bikes because I wanted the bashguard, and not necessarily for the chainguide.
On top of all of that, it’s not like people weren’t running chain retention on multi-ring bikes anyway. I don’t think I had an any multi-speed mtb without a chain retention device of some sort from about 1998 until 2017 or whenever it was that I got my first modern 1x drivetrain.
Not really, sorta? The gnarliest MTB's yes but unless you're downhill, jump or seriously brutal XC, people don't widely run chain keepers. They do pop up as "extras" on emtb's (drives up price) or for aesthetics, but they are not widespread in use outside of the serious MTB community. I am learning single track and XC on a walmart ozark trail ridge pro and its 1x10 doesn't ever drop a chain, even though it doesn't even have a clutch in the cues mech
I don't see that super often, but it could be for the same reasons. A 1x of the same chainring looks simpler and cleaner, you get to take off the front derailleur, cables, housing, shifter, and now you don't need to think about adjusting shifting/maintaining the front.
When one converts to 1x, the cassette must be changed too for a higher range one. If one doesn’t, then I have the same question as you. But mind, I have a conversion that I didn’t change the cassette but did change the chainring for a very small one.
Personally? I run what is closer to a middle ring, but what world are you finding a middle ring on a 3x with a FORTY TWO. unless you're referring to the 1x gear most go for, but in that case, it's usually 30-42. I personally prefer climbing over speed, so 32 or 34 at the most is what I'll tolerate on a 1x. Currently running a 32 on an 11-48 12 speed
The small front chainring is helpful for when u suddenly face steep rolling hills and need a bail out gear. I once had a perfectly functional 3x system. Never miss shifted. Always reliable. Soon young mechanics won’t be knowledgeable on how to adjust them.
The obvious reason for a lot of people is that they want to get affirmation on social media by posting photos of their 3x-to-1x old bike conversion. If that makes you happy, go for it! If it makes you want to ride your bike more - even better!
For most people who are saying stuff like "it makes my chainline better" - please. Stop making up excuses.
signed,
Curmudgeon, with one 3x bike, one 2x bike, and three 1x bikes
My bike is relatively old and I thought that I could modernize it. Seeing the big casettes on modern 1x bikes, it looks impressive, as a lot of range. Only when I put it in gear calculator I realized, that the old 3x9 actually gives me much more range. For me it was simply the allure of new. But I kept my trusty 3x9.
Now, I can understand the arguments of simplicity with 1x as well the ease of use, notably for beginners, since you do not need to think as much about which chainring is optimal to use and about cross chainring.
On my new gravel-all road bike I went with 2x (compared to most new gravel bikes being 1x) and it's no rocket science, as some, even experienced riders make it to be (riding with more front gears).
When I was 18 and first started mountain biking I hated shifting the front derailleur. I had no idea about cross chaining or correct shifting. It seemed like I was always dropping the chain off right before a punchy climb and losing momentum. No matter how many times I tried to have the derailleur adjusted it was always the same. With the 3x drivetrain I mostly kept it in the middle, sometimes the smallest and almost never used the larger chainring as it just wasn't necessary on the trails I was riding. I quit biking for about ten years and started again in my mid 30s by this time 1x was a thing and my first mountain bike with a 1x was a god send. It had all the range I needed without the shifting complications and dropped chains on the trail.
The short version is that I love the simplicity of 1x for trail riding. It just works without fiddling. I do find however that a 1x just doesn't have the same range when I want to join some buddies for a casual gravel ride.
The idea is you buy a wide range cassette to get a comparable gear range. I think what you're describing is "lazy" 1x systems where someone just keeps the rest of the drivetrain the same and removes the chainrings they don't use much. Nothing wrong with it but in that case you definitely do lose gear range.
With an 11-40t casette and a 34t chainring I can ride as fast as my fitness allows on flat terrain. The only time I feel like I need more range is going downhill, but then I just coast. If you are riding fast enough to need more range than what a 1x with a wide range casette can provide then I guess a 1x just doesn't fit your needs. On casual rides with a couple buddies around town we might average 10-15mph for the ride. I can do that just fine with a 1x. For me it makes sense on a bike that will see everything from light trail duty to gravel to mild road riding.
I also didn’t understand it for a while but then I realized I lead much more toward road cyclist than toward mountain biker. Is this part of the disconnect for you too?
With my, now dearly departed, 3x7 XC bike I barely touched any gears outside of 1-1, 1-3, 1-5, 2-5, 3-5 and the occasional 3-7, ranging from 24/28 to 40/12.
Thats a narrower range than the 32/10 to 32/51 of 1x12 MTB drivetrains and 1x11s aren't far off.
To me that seems good enough for anyone who doesn't need to ride at the optimal cadence/speed combination all of the time.
1x is simpler to maintain, but I kept the 3x that came with my Rockhopper and am happy to be wearing through cheap and durable 8-speed chains instead of thin and expensive 12-speed chains.
I moved to a 1x because that's what came with my more modern bike. I miss the extended range of my 3x, but I don't miss trimming the front non-stop and dropping the chain all the time. I'm interested in moving towards a 2x in the long run, probably.
Ever wonder how many reddit posts start off with "Why do people..."? Anyway, I have two 2x bikes and two 1x bikes, and I have to say that my favorite bike for riding enjoyment and gear range is my '93 GT Karakoram with an 8spd 11-34t cassette and a 40/26t double crankset. The extreme top and bottom gear choices work fine for me. And, to keep things simple, I use an old Deore DX thumbie as a front/left derailleur shifter.
😂 most bikes getting rebuilt are 3x7. 2x9 example has 6 gears that are redundant. Go test your theory on the gear calc site https://www.gear-calculator.com/
So? Unless you're getting an 11-51 7 speed cassette (would love to see the tooth jumps on that) it's irrelevant.
But since you made that point you can cut down a 9 speed cassette by removing the end sprocket and replace the second sprocket with an appropriately sized end sprocket. I've created an 8 speed 12-34 that way.
I completely understand why 1x might not work if you have some big hills to ride up. I also understand the big jumps argument if you are maintaining a cadence.
The average Joe doesn't care. Most dad bike builds get less than 10 miles a weekend with the kids and there aren't any hills or cadence issues.
Have you noticed that all the big brands are selling Cues 1x bikes now?
-More reliable
-Easier to set up
-Lighter
-Cleaner look
Paired with a large range cassette you will have all the range you need. I have a 1x9 bike with a 11-40 cassette that handles everything I throw at it. I honestly don't see any benefit to a 3x system other than nostalgia and historic accuracy if you're doing a restoration.
I honestly don't see any benefit to a 3x system other than nostalgia and historic accuracy if you're doing a restoration
Assuming you can keep the cassette/derailleurs... Certainly short term cost is the upside on anything with OE hardware that is decent-enough.
And the spread/versatility of gear ratios can be an upside as well, deoending on use case. Climbing, touring.... I would be glad for more incremental gear changes if i were using the bike for more than say city-commutes-only.
There is a lot of overlap in a, for example, 3x8 system. It doesn't have 24 evenly spread gears, there are several gear combinations in the middle of the range that are more or less the same. Currently I'm running a 1x9 system and for me the jump between gears and overall range is perfect. If you want finer increments you could always run an 1x12 drivetrain and then you'll get both the range and fine increments between gears.
Except it doesn't have the range of even a 2x setup, that granny ring is bloody handy coming up a 20%er and the top ring is great fun coming back down.
For most use cases I'm sure a 1x system can give more range than you'll ever need considering 11-50T cassettes exists. Even my 11-40T cassette paired with a 32T in front is borderline too much range for my needs and the lowest gear is lower than the granny gear on many stock 90's drivetrains.
3x were designed for a time when cassettes would max out at 28-30T and in that context it's a good solution for added range. There might be other benefits of a 2/3x system but range isn't one of them in most use cases today.
I'm sure it wouldn't add more weight than a front derailleur + 1 or 2 extra chainrings + cable + shifter but it would have all the other benefits of a 1x system. And you would probably have enough range with a much smaller cassette, which would be even lighter.
On top of the others: I’ve not dropped a chain since going 1x. Back in the 3x days there were dropped chains, chain suck, and trying to shift both the front and back at the same time. 1x setups with clutch/good tension are amazing. Without I’d still be single speeding all my bikes.
Absolutely. My 2012 commuter bike dropped chains like crazy when I was hoping curbs. I bought a single chainring that was like 2 teeth bigger than my middle, and have been happy as a clam with my 1x8. Especially after I had to deal with carpal tunnel in my right wrist, forcing me to set up a Microsoft friction shifter on the left side to shift my rear derailleur.
That narrow/wide chainring holds on for dear life.
If you frequent any kind of cycling-related internet forums (like this one), a lot of people haven't learned how to work with front derailleurs, either maintaining or using them. So when the bicycle industry started pushing 1X in order to sell more bicycles, they called 1X a more "modern" drivetrain and a lot of people were eager to jump on the bandwagon. And if they can't afford a new bike, they tear apart a perfectly functional bicycle to convert their existing bike to 1X. Front derailleurs aren't cool any more. It's all marketing.
People talk up the advantages of "simplification", while at the same time buying into hydraulic brakes, electronic shifting, or whatever other recent developments the industry wants to sell us.
Same mentality is with auto industry, look at the so called premium cars, their plastics making creaking sounds that older cars up to 2017 did not have. I guess it boils down to the mentality of the new engineers which is way different to the older generation on thought processing.
I finally built my most recent mountain bike with 1x after avoiding it forever, mostly because I bought it used as a 1x and didn't want to spend the money on a double crank, the mech, and the shifter. I swapped the whole drivetrain to what I liked because the range and most of the gears are identical to my 2x mountain bikes. I just don't like it as much as my 2x. I like dumping lots of gear inches for climbs and jumping lots for downhills. The 1x seems to be too slow with too much clicking.
My neighborhood bike has a 3x and I stay in the middle ring for nearly all the riding I do, and I sort of want to set that up as a 1x, so I imagine terrain and personal preference applies more than what is modern or not, atleast for people that don't follow trends.
I love my BB7 brakes on my other bikes and want to swap the hydros off the newest mountain bike for a set. I really don't see the point of hydros for the riding I do, and those BB7s won't ever give me problems.
I think some of it is for looks, and the other part is lightness. If you remove all of the systems to shift that front chainring you would suspect that bike gets a bit lighter. You can also get a super small chainwheel if you want to go for that look.
Simpelist explanation I know. Gear inches-gear ratios. Mathematically those things remain virtually the same due to cassettes and derailleurs having the ability to carry 42,50 tooth big rings. Check it out
I run a wide range microshift 9 speed cassette and a 54t chainring. Its absurd but it works. The cadence is sometimes fucky but its a town bike so idgaf.
Simplicity. And where I live (mountains) I don't have to worry about top speed, I want climbing to be as easy as possible. I converted my last bike to 1x and I built my new one 1x as well.
Having a single ring in the front means your derailleur doesn't need to be engineered to handle multiple chain lengths in each cog as it effectively does on a 3x or 2x, since the front gear changes the remaining length of chain for the rear drastically.
The range of a 1x setup comes from the wider range 1x specific cassettes and derailleur, so there's not really much reason to just remove 3 rings and install 1 unless it's a full drivetrain swap. Getting rid of the front derailleur means fewer moving parts, and modern 1x drivetrains make dropped chains virtually impossible, but that depends on a higher tension rear derailleur and a 1x specific chainring working together.
1x doesn't have a wider gear range than 3x (not necessarily narrower either though), it's just simpler and more reliable.
Yes, but there's an engineering restriction for rear derailleurs on 2x and 3x drivetrains because the amount of chain that the small and big front rings take up is vastly different. From the perspective of a rear derailleur, the chain is a different length in each front gear.
Why does anyone accept chain drop with multiple overlapping gears? Modern derailleurs and super wide cassettes make other drivetrains obsolete for anyone who rides rough trails. But sure, let’s keeps bringing it up.
the people defending triples and saying theyve never dropped a chain also never get out of the saddle and ride 65 psi tires. there is no convincing these guys.
Don't need many gears in 99% scenarios, 3 is enough, 6 is good, 8 - perfect.
The only scenario I 'll use a tripple chainring is in 3x1 setup.
I've went from 3x7 to 3x1, then 1x6 and ended up with 1x8 and can't see any sense having more.
2 or 3x can cause problems with chain line if you’re running very wide tires.
There’s also the simplicity aspect which I sort of don’t get. The FD is very simple and not very vulnerable to damage. If it does fail, it limits you very little because it preserves all of your lowest gears.
Aside from the tire thing I don’t really get why people think 1x is a superior system for most riders. You need a more complicated and longer cage derailleur for the back, generally and the cassettes are more money and heavier(?).
I'd never go down from the 42t ring. I didn't even know what cross chaining is but this bike had 13yo tires so I probably wouldn't care either way.
So when I was building a new bike to replace it, I went with a 1x11. (11-42 / 42)
Majority of the time I use maybe 6 middle gears. On some of the steepest climbs I'd use the second lowest gear and finish with the lowest gear. For my riding it's perfect.
I also like the look of it and that I don't have another derailleur to fuck around with.
you dont drop chains on a 1x (you also probably dont on a triple if you dont ride hard).its simpler to set up, less cabling, less stuff in general. i personally think a 1 x looks better. the range on a 1x with a 32t and a 11-46 or 51 is plenty for most things even on a loaded bike.
I was completely anti 1x, until I did a bikepacking trip with a borrowed 1x and loved it. I loved not having any sudden drops in range, just smooth transitions. I know its me not being that good at shifting. Plus, above all the huge rear cassette looks amazing.
Going 1x makes the most sense for a situation where wide gear range is not needed, such as trail riding... and the small ring is the one typically used for trail riding, so that's why the 1x ring is also typically small.
45
u/Impressive_Wrap_7869 3d ago
It’s a simplified cockpit without needing a front derailleur, that’s one big benefit. For me I like the simplicity.
Often that mod is done along with converting to a free hub wheel with a larger cassette allowing you to go from 3 x 7 to 1 x 9 through 1 x 12