Hamish wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 9:52 am When 3x and 2x was the thing it was straightforward to get the ratios you wanted and even some spare capacity in reserve... 1x may be great in some ways but there is always talk of where you have to compromise in terms of ratios, chainline, durability, how fussy it is to tune into and maintian good shifting etc.

People seem to like it though and in some ways I do. So is it here to stay? Or will we see a return to front shifters?

There's not that much compromise TBH, on my Solaris which is 1x10 I rarely use either the lowest or highest gears so range (for me) isn't really a problem. By the time I run out of gears at the low end I'm at a speed or on terrain that getting off and walking is probably the better option. At the top end by the time I spin out, i.e. I'm doing a reasonably impression of a cartoon hamster, I'm doing something like 45km/h.

Chainline - set it once and forget about it. No different in that respect to 2x or 3x setups.

Good shifting - I might tweak the barrel adjuster once every six months or so, then again I might not.

Durability - changed the cassette and chain the other week. They'd been on for two years. I might get better life out of a more expensive cassette and chain but I don't know.

If I had a bike with a working and reliable FD I wouldn't change to 1x "just because" but if building up something new (MTB wise) then I'd go straight to 1x.

YMMV, HYOH, etc.

Lazarus wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 11:54 am

2x might be the more versatile option in a pinch but for most situations, most of the riding, most of the time, I'm happy with the simples of 1x.

Agreed but my bikepacking bikes both have a granny ring - all be it i "ghost shift" to them - which means I just heel kick the chain on to it - its only 25 g heavier than a 1 x and the only downside is you need to change up manually obvs
the advantage is i ride with a 36 ring which i would never do if it was my only ring [ 32 or 30 usually for 1 x]

Ditto on the Gryphon - thumb shift for the cassette, granny on the cranks and whatever shift "mechanism" fits at the time (heel or hand).

I did that on my old fatbike and have this setup on my gravel/road bike.

It works but I rarely use it.

No.

whitestone wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:27 pm
Chainline - set it once and forget about it. No different in that respect to 2x or 3x setups.

Durability - changed the cassette and chain the other week. They'd been on for two years. I might get better life out of a more expensive cassette and chain but I don't know.

YMMV, HYOH, etc.

The chainline thing is probably not so relevant using wide tyres, but generally on a triple or double you can find a good chainline amongst your gear combinations... Eg grinding up a hill on small ring/big sprocket. On a 1x your chainline it will tend to be a compromise somewhere. It doesn't really bother me but I can see the wear on the side of the chainring that shows the chainline is sometimes extreme and the teeth are like throwing stars...

Durability - two years is good going. I try and keep to wear limits on my chain to maximize the life of the rest but I tend to get through 2 or 3 chains a year on my most used bikes and even then a cassette probably only lasts a couple of years. I have always worn chains out though so it must be me.

Hamish wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 9:52 am compromise in terms of ratios, chainline, durability, how fussy it is to
tune into and maintian good shifting etc.

Any source about compromise of durability, tune and maintain good shifting? Have you ever set one up yourself? Definately much easier and faster than faffing about with two mechs.
It really has never been so easy.

My experience with 3 bikes on Sram Eagle drivetrains (pure Eagle system, no other brand's components mixed in) is very different. More durable than any drivetrain I ever had before, no matter if it was some ghetto 1
x, classic 2 x or 3 x systems, Sram or Shimano. Same with precision and maintenance;
The most impressive has been my XX1 drivetrain. 3 - 4 clicks on the shifter for tension, one new chain. I've been using it since 2017. That was all I ever had to do.
The derailleur has seen a fair share of banging against rocks and looks beaten, but still as precise as new.
Usually, with the amount and type of riding and the conditions I ride it in, this used to require 7 - 8 chains and two drivetrains. I used to go through a rear derailleur every 2 - 3 years due to smacking it into stuff and damaging it beyond repair. Perhaps my riding has changed some, that this doesn't happen anymore... I don't think so, my riding has gotten wilder since getting aboard the big and fast bike with the XX1 drivetrain.

Here are two from many other places to dive into this "how durable is 1x" question:
https://cyclingtips.com/2019/12/the-bes ... cy-tested/

https://bikepacking.com/gear/sram-eagle-review/

One persons view of this may be "fake news", "marketing bs" or so, but for me these are just confirmation of my own experience.

Eagle 12 does have a good durability rep, which only makes me wonder why Sram and Shimano couldn't manage the same durability with 10 or 11s.

Higher end Eagle has a good rep, everyone seems to bitch about SX.

PaulB2 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 10:33 am Higher end Eagle has a good rep, everyone seems to bitch about SX.

Wibbly crank arms and a not-fully-threaded pedal thread is my only experience with SX, swiftly being replaced and donated to father in laws "bimbling around" build. Made of cheese.*

*I'm usually super cautious about giving it full welly with anecdotal experience but it's really pished me off this one

Interesting responses thanks everyone.

For me, 1x is the way without question. My roadish bike (arkose) has 2x but if it and when it wears out again, I would remove the front mech etc. (I dont really need the closeness of ratios for my use)

The other bike(s) have been 1x for many years. I was fishing into the giant cassette question. I generally use 30t or 32t with 11-42 or 11-46 rear. I can see the advantage of going to 10t at the back, absolutely. I was curious if people actually wanted the 50t when on many mtb's the chainrings max out at 34t round 32t oval. Even my 'gravel' mason maxes at 36t round on a shimano crank only. (Raceface rings are closer to the frame)

I guess the answer is some yes, some no... I will be sticking to the front tooth count so wondered about its worth for the rear larger tooth count. I'm eeking the last of life out the current cassette / chain / ring / mech for a bit longer but may bite the bullet and change the freehub next time. I know that I can mix and match brands, but I'll need to get behind a freehub

PaulB2 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 10:33 am Higher end Eagle has a good rep, everyone seems to bitch about SX.

GX rear mech was, compared to the XX1 expectedly, not as durable with a very comparable mileage/age, though smoother riding, less knocking about etc.
The whole mech has developed so much play, I'm going to replace it, since the shifting is a bit off in one place.
Given the price of GX I feel Shimano may be the better option (for those non Sram fanboys*girls).

Once at the X01 level or XX1 level the stuff is tits.
That's why I replaced the GX mech with X01 mech - cassette and chain were X01 anyways.

jameso wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:43 am Eagle 12 does have a good durability rep, which only makes me wonder why Sram and Shimano couldn't manage the same durability with 10 or 11s.

I remember the Sram R&D going on about how they see the drivetrain as an integer system and developed it from there.
Not so sure the focus was so much on this before and from experience with other riders, it does seem, that durabilty is not as good when the Eagle is mixed with other stuff. Same from dropping chains and shifting. I know, since I built my girlfriends everyday/offroad touring bike with cheap(ish) Sram derailleur, Sunrace cassette and SLX chainring/cranks. What a mess. Never again - "I'm sorry honey".

Alpinum wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:20 pm I remember the Sram R&D going on about how they see the drivetrain as an integer system and developed it from there.
Not so sure the focus was so much on this before and from experience with other riders, it does seem, that durabilty is not as good when the Eagle is mixed with other stuff. Same from dropping chains and shifting. I know, since I built my girlfriends everyday/offroad touring bike with cheap(ish) Sram derailleur, Sunrace cassette and SLX chainring/cranks. What a mess. Never again - "I'm sorry honey".

Shimano have always said the same about systems though, down to the cable spec for shifting quality. Perhaps the durability point has come up in response to the Qs raised about 1x chain lines and wear rates, whether worse than 2x or not (depends how it's used vs the 2x I guess, cross-chaining a 2x will be worse)

Alpinum wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:17 am

Hamish wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 9:52 am compromise in terms of ratios, chainline, durability, how fussy it is to
tune into and maintian good shifting etc.

Any source about compromise of durability, tune and maintain good shifting? Have you ever set one up yourself? Definately much easier and faster than faffing about with two mechs.
It really has never been so easy.

i am fairly new to 1x and don't have purebred set up. It works well enough and I am very happy with it for unladen riding. My biggest sprocket is only 42. I would want a lower gear for loaded trips so I am interested in set ups with a 50 odd tooth big sprocket.

My questions were based on talking to friends and reading around the issue. It's good to hear positive reports. The main setup issues I have heard are due to getting the shifting working well over time rather than on initial setup; but they are on mixed component systems.

Durability is so subjective and becomes important as the cost increases. If you buy expensive cassettes and chains you want them to last so it's reassuring to hear your experience. Intersting that the article confirms what I have read elsewhere, that the new narrow chains last well.

Hamish wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 12:56 am
Durability is so subjective and becomes important as the cost increases. If you buy expensive cassettes and chains you want them to last so it's reassuring to hear your experience. Intersting that the article confirms what I have read elsewhere, that the new narrow chains last well.

Durability is also dependent on local conditions. The gritty mud of much of the UK poses a big challenge for MTB components.
What lasts well elsewhere can get beat up pretty quickly here.
Californian and Japanese designed gear doesn’t often like mud IME.

lune ranger wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:27 am

Hamish wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 12:56 am
Durability is so subjective and becomes important as the cost increases. If you buy expensive cassettes and chains you want them to last so it's reassuring to hear your experience. Intersting that the article confirms what I have read elsewhere, that the new narrow chains last well.

Durability is also dependent on local conditions. The gritty mud of much of the UK poses a big challenge for MTB components.
What lasts well elsewhere can get beat up pretty quickly here.
Californian and Japanese designed gear doesn’t often like mud IME.

Yes, our conditions are quite tough. I had a bike that I mainly used on trail centres and the chain lasted ages compared to the bikes I'd use on the hills, bridleways and beaches. The brake pads wore out fast though. Would a UK designed chain be any different I wonder?

Hamish wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:16 pm Would a UK designed chain be any different I wonder?

More durable but heavier?



I used to have an 1/8th chain on a singlespeed but it wore just as fast. I think the wear is in the pins/holes they sit in not the plates so the size/speed of the chain doesn't seem to make much difference?

sean_iow wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:26 pm I used to have an 1/8th chain on a singlespeed but it wore just as fast.

Same here.

sean_iow wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:26 pm I think the wear is in the pins/holes they sit in not the plates so the size/speed of the chain doesn't seem to make much difference?

That's how I understand wear too.

When I did my SS i just used an old worn 9 speed chain I had lying around
Oddly I have changed the front chainring [ new crank required new ring] and rear for new parts at different times [ nether was because what i had was not working/worn/slipping]

Chain worked fine and continues to work fine [STrava says 4000 miles on it over the last 6 years ] I wonder how worn that chain is - dont really care it still works.
I dont really buy into tth eindustry mantra ogf when to replace a chain and tend to do it if i get isues

i would love to have the time and resources to do an actual experiment but my hunch is there is no real point changing your chain as the wear is from the grit/dirt rather than the worn chain.

Alpinum wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:19 pm

sean_iow wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:26 pm I used to have an 1/8th chain on a singlespeed but it wore just as fast.

Same here.

sean_iow wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:26 pm I think the wear is in the pins/holes they sit in not the plates so the size/speed of the chain doesn't seem to make much difference?

That's how I understand wear too.

Agreed, I had a massive heavy duty single speed chain on my Rohloff driven Woodrup I used to have. It wore out in now time. Much faster than the SRAM chain that followed it.

Hamish wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:03 pm

Alpinum wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:19 pm

sean_iow wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:26 pm I used to have an 1/8th chain on a singlespeed but it wore just as fast.

Same here.

sean_iow wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:26 pm I think the wear is in the pins/holes they sit in not the plates so the size/speed of the chain doesn't seem to make much difference?

That's how I understand wear too.

Agreed, I had a massive heavy duty single speed chain on my Rohloff driven Woodrup I used to have. It wore out in now time. Much faster than the SRAM chain that followed it.

My ssps both have wide steel cogs and narrow/wide alu chainrings. Surely not a good combination in my experience, but instead of using same sized/material cog and chainring, I keep changing chains... would probably be worth investing in a different chainring in my case.

I like my giant 10-50 cassette
But only because it lets me run a bigger chainring I’m geared the same at the bottom end now but don’t spin out on the road. I’m running AXS Eagle on dropbars. If you look at the specs the extra on the 12 speed really don’t make much sense unless you need the extra top end.

The Shimano 10-45 looks like a nice cassette, I think one of the problems of 1x systems is the ..ratio taper?
At a certain point, either gurning or gunning a big shift is ok. If I’m going up a sudden big hill that big jump is welcome, same as when you crest a big hill.
The bit in the middle is where I get frustrated, Fast forest tracks, road and gentle climbs leave me often leave me between gears. I’m beginning to think that 2 X 11/12 might be a better option for me.

ime 1/8" chains can wear fast but most likely cause is most of ones we use being made fairly cheap / basic, don't know if many of us fit top-end NJS track chains to our winter SS? I get the same with basic SS chains in 3/32" vs a better KMC. Had what seemed like amazingly fast wear rate from a rust-proof zinc plated chain, but it was tighter (under 0.25 in the chain checker from new, close to 0) to begin with and what I though was pin/roller wear was probably just the inner zinc plating wearing off - it needed rapid EBB adjustment then seemed to be fairly normal towards the 0.75 - 1.0 stage.

A good high-end 11 or 12s chain is made with harder roller and inner plates so if you had a 1/8" chain made to the same quality or material hardness as the top end chain I think it should last longer - there's more surface area in the roller and inner plate to spread the load and wear over? Same for any chain wider than a 12s, though 10 to 11 to 12s is hardly a change to notice in wear rates among all the noise.

Alert Luddite warning
Wears the profit.
The cynic in me thinks change for change sake, else we'd just buy very few spares on our 7 speed uniglide bikes. Just trashed rear mechs or wear out the inner Chainring on our triples. Rims d brakes blocks as well. Then shimano saw potential in Over-Under engineering, (did I really say that. ). They really drove the mountain bike market, Lighter & more ratio sell! .

Slicker gear changes sells. (I'll give them that)
light weight sells,
(ahem Keep quiet about Reduced durability, we're not campag)
'Wanting' durability, sells!
- he's lost it...
NO, Ahar, It sells workshop time & spares..

Get the local bike shops on board, after they've got endless complaints a requesting money back.. about broken sub standard, I bought 3 months ago...
( Never mind, the quality, feel the price..).

Then next year, you need another bike 'cos it all lighter and shiny and honestly its cheaper than fixing it.. Sir..

Old skool,sold you a very expensive durable bike, for life, Xmas rush( ££profit), and used bikes, £. "Ticking over, new chain & brake blocks, broken spokes & annual services, except custom wheels for the rodies"

New skool lighter, light cheaper bikes ££, ('we're almost giving it away' , we'll tell 'em that!) increased sales, lower margins££.
Loses of used bike sales(don't handle stolen bike tale or not worth hastle) . Busier workshop £££ lots to fix frequent customer in buying latest tat in the shops - every one's happy.

On the double or triple chainsets the inner front ring wore out. But only after shimmy reduce the size of the rear cassette, possible now it wasn't a freewheel.
Suntour, campagnolo & sachs*chains, Mavic (now part of Sram) were bigger players in each segment than shimano and proud of their tech & Eng. expertise, thus reliability outstanding, compared to shitmano, they were was legendary Think Saab rather than Ford (Fix Or Repair Daily).
They used to say 'Campag wear in, shitmano wears out.'
Marketing driven Technological improvements, for change sake, packaged as Innovation - else sales would flatline..
Or how to design & engineer something properly.
"The right way, the wrong way & shitmano way."
I'll stick with my 9 speed Sturmy Archer. 3x3 at back. Yes cyclo really made it, in the 60's. Fair tools - Birmingham, well mafe for the time..

Actually I now have a 'Rohloff speed hub 500/14 DB.' 1 changed the rim after 12 years, v brakes. (Exciting when dirty or wet, no tittering please ) . , reversed the rear sprocket & replaced the chain with the Chainrings. A few tyres, Not bad after 20 years. I have logged mileage maybe 25k
(My first adult bike original bike is still going, Suntour, a few new chain & change of freewheel to 6 speed, down friction shifters, and upgraded to triple chainset, my knee couldn't handle Pennines (Yorkshire hills), it must have 25k miles on it by now, gone to a mate).
Wears the profit!!

sean_iow wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:26 pm

Hamish wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:16 pm Would a UK designed chain be any different I wonder?

More durable but heavier?



I used to have an 1/8th chain on a singlespeed but it wore just as fast. I think the wear is in the pins/holes they sit in not the plates so the size/speed of the chain doesn't seem to make much difference?

Correct pin & hole wear, bushed chains were better, if protected.
Water spray & grit wears it irregardless.
Mostly from the front not back wheel! Keep a front guard /fender & part chainguard & will increase chain life. Aesthetically
If you think you don't want the look, put up with the crap.


My solution, chain wear what's that!

ChainRing guard, front & rear mudguards

Might I ask, in the sweetest, least confrontational way, but have you been drinking?