doctor-bond
Feature Bike
Some quite compelling arguments for 1x, but I’m holding out for 1x14 before locking in: will need that 8t rear to match what my 48t big ring triple set can do on the long downhills at Dalby …. 
1x12 conversion
- Thread starter russ77
- Start date
Definitely agree!
The problem I have is that the ever-narrower chains and sprockets have shorter lives, worsened by more extreme chainlines. Add in the smaller distances for everything and it all more tetchy on stuff like alignment.
But that's fine, I don't have to buy it (and I won't).
You could keep your 48t big ring and lose the lowest couple ratios with the 11-50 cassette.. 50:48 = 27:26. Depends on your terrain and such I supposeSome quite compelling arguments for 1x, but I’m holding out for 1x14 before locking in: will need that 8t rear to match what my 48t big ring triple set can do on the long downhills at Dalby ….
Cloverleaf
Retro Guru
- Feedback
- View
Ditching the front mech was predominantly pushed by manufacturers wanting to build decent 29" long travel frames and still have decent width tyres fitted. Front mechs add nearly an inch to the chainstay length if you want it to clear anything wider than 2.2" which slows handling among other things. Losing the front mech to me is one of the major advancements in the MTB because it means you can put suspension pivots where they need to be, make them wider for stiffer and stronger connections, and have a shorter back end even with a 29" wheel while fitting a 2.5" tyre in there. For the abuse I put my bike through and the predominantly crap conditions it gets ridden in I'm mightily impressed with SRAM X01 Eagle longevity. The current cassette is on 7000km of mud, slop and torridonian sandstone grit. Chains last about 2000km. This is by far the toughest drivetrain I've used, from 8spd XTR all the way up to 11spd, and includes 9/10spd SRAM XO. I don't like SRAM as a company and don't generally like their design philosophies but man, their Eagle cassettes and chains are fantastic. I think 9spd was the real down point in drivetrains as the chains were thinner than the materials and design would allow, and the front derailleur allowed things to slap about more. I don't have exact logs but 9spd cassettes and chains never seemed to last in my use, whereas 10spd was better if not as good as M950, and then 11spd was faultless if you avoided Shimano XT cassettes which seemed to be made from chocolate.
bikeworkshop
Senior Retro Guru
^this^
the front mech limits mtb frame design in this area
the front mech limits mtb frame design in this area
Suprachrgd82
GT Fan
highlandsflyer
Retro Wizard
- Feedback
- View
I really like the 3x10 on our modern-ish Clockwork. The range, roughly 19/112, is great for moderate progress as well as the ultra slow climbing we enjoy. That range is found on the 1x12, but I would spend a lot of time grinding the lower ratios. I like being able to swap out worn sprockets and chainrings. It irks me to bin a cassette that is 60% unworn. Are they making 12 speeds you can pull spart?
bikeworkshop
Senior Retro Guru
It's a symptom of wide range 1x that a favourite gear on the cassette gets trashed fast - especially if you're on road.
However, shimano now offer some of the sprockets individually- we have managed to double the life of some 11+ cassettes as a result, although it involved hours researching shimano/ madison part numbers
@Cloverleaf - an interesting point you make about design freedom for full sussers, which makes complete sense.
However for me I don't anticipate ever owning one - I'm too crap & old and heal too slowly to do the kind of stuff and speeds that make one worth it. For my kind of riding they merely make it dull (bought one, tried it, sold it after a month). As it is I am the kind who rides a rigid singlespeed most of the time.
All the durability argument is great, newer chains do seem better but in 40 years in engineering I've never yet seen a wide load bearing surface wear faster than a narrow one - all other things being equal. They simply aren't trying and keep the decent materials on the fancy groupsets - but that's marketing for you.
9s was indeed a low point for Shimano - the cable pull per click was simply not big enough to overcome muck and stickiness and I recall pals folding up the sprockets on early cassettes (around 1997). By comparison Campag 9s road with the longer cable pull never, ever needed adjusting. But the 10s Deore on No.1 son's bike was a doddle to set up and seems to stay true - all down to the long cable pull.
However for me I don't anticipate ever owning one - I'm too crap & old and heal too slowly to do the kind of stuff and speeds that make one worth it. For my kind of riding they merely make it dull (bought one, tried it, sold it after a month). As it is I am the kind who rides a rigid singlespeed most of the time.
All the durability argument is great, newer chains do seem better but in 40 years in engineering I've never yet seen a wide load bearing surface wear faster than a narrow one - all other things being equal. They simply aren't trying and keep the decent materials on the fancy groupsets - but that's marketing for you.
9s was indeed a low point for Shimano - the cable pull per click was simply not big enough to overcome muck and stickiness and I recall pals folding up the sprockets on early cassettes (around 1997). By comparison Campag 9s road with the longer cable pull never, ever needed adjusting. But the 10s Deore on No.1 son's bike was a doddle to set up and seems to stay true - all down to the long cable pull.
