Front Derailleur cable pull ratios - 11sp 105 R7000 road STI, Deore XT T8000 triple FD
- Thread starter wafter
- Start date
Indeed; sadly lots of searching has failed to turn up any acceptable solutions.. I'd not considered using a cable release in the way you suggest - that really would be a shot in the dark and unfortunately too much faff for my tastes.If it's possible, someone will have probably already done it and you'd find it online
I wondered if you could set up a double for the mid/large ring, but run the cable through an inline quick release, so in the middle gear, you could release some cable with the QR, dropping the (triple) front mech onto the inner gear stop set up to align with the small front ring.
Smcb90:
View attachment 873525
Designed for brake cable obvs but could be fitted up by the bar - same size end caps.
As an aside, many regular cyclists used to a front triple find the change to double compact shifting timing annoying at first, but nearly everyone forgets about it after getting used to 2x11.
Maximum angles on 3x11 bring new problems, so I think shimano & others decided to kick the 3x into touch and design rear mechs that could handle dinner plates to get back the overall 400%+ of ( touring) range.
We've done front doubles with custom rings for a lot of bikes - you can push it to 16t difference, maybe more, just choose your starting ratios.
1st gear sprocket on the cassette defines your choices though - and this in turn is determined by the choice of derailleur.
Modern long cage road 11s (with the drop hanger)View attachment 873536
will do 40t, and grx can do 42, and maybe more -
Chainstay length and chainline can complicate matters!
It's easy for us to see what's possible as we have every derailleur and cassette option on the shelf, so can swap everything out to find the limit.
It's far harder for an individual to get right as you only know what works to your own expectation by actually trying it, as this is stepping out of the Shimano Playbook.
Unfortunately for this exercise I'm not "many cyclists". When moving from the 3x9 Sora on my old Giant to the 2x10 Tiagra on the Boardman that replaced it, I told myself that "the industry knows best" (even though I had a healthy cynicism for manufacturers in other fields in which I was more educated), however found the double a pain and missed the triple.
The Giant gone (cracked frame) I accepted that I was unlikely to get another triple, and put up with the double on this and the subsequent bike (Genesis with 2x11 105); however buying a Fuji Touring with 3x9 Deore / mishmash as a shopping hack instantly reminded me of why I love triples so much.
I imagine doubles are fine if you're strong enough to be in the big ring most of the time; unfortunately with ratios as they are that's certainly not the case for me; nor most other fairly casual / recreational cyclists I'd imagine.
I'd question the "angles" argument with the triple - I can run the full width of the cassette from the middle ring on the Fuji with no complaints, while presumably if using either of the adjacent chainrings you'd only be using the appropriate 1/2 - 2/3rds of the cassette anyway. Granted this is only 9sp so maybe 10, 11 and 12sp cassettes are more problematic in this regard.
I also appreciate the techncial foibles of having the FD needing to occuply a stop-less middle ground for the middle ring unlike a double that can be located precisely on the limit screws.
Tbh the cynic in me thinks that the demise of triples has more to do with cost saving, ease of setup and manufactured fashion than it does practical limitations.
I have no issues with 1x in the correct context (MTB), although that of course isn't without its shortcomings and I firmly believe it has no place on touring / utility / even gravel bikes (depending on how gravelly they are).
I'd be very interested to hear more about the doubles you've managed - one route I was considering was trying to get an adaptor made for a direct mount MTB crank (to give the nice wide Q-factor I need and the best versatility re. chainring options) however it seems that the chainring sizes I'd need sit awkwardly between bolt BCD standards.. I wonder about using rings from triples to get what I need, although most of these seem to be 9 or 10 speed since the format is being phased out.
What do you reckon about using chainrings intended for fewer speeds with 11sp chains? I appreciate that pitch between rings will change although the width of the rings themselves should stay the same as the internal width of the chains remains constant from 8-12sp, does it not..?
Thanks and yes; I could lash something up but I'm after a clean, OEM-grade installation.
For the above reasons - too untidy for my liking I'm afraid!
And you would be right.
Along with the proliferation of bottom bracket standards and wheel sizes.
But fortunately Shimano will ride to the rescue in 2030 with a new range of triples to solve the problems of the narrow range of 1x systems.
lol - glad I'm not the only one with this perspective; as unfortunate as it is.
Wheels I can kind of see some legitimacy in but don't get me started on BB standards - everything I own is now standard BSA threaded, and that's the way it will stay..
They've certainly done a great job of making many already-landfuill-bait placcy road bikes even less appealing with press-fit; which rightfully now seems to have gone the way of the dodo; not that it should ever have existed in the first place.
11 speed upwards has narrower chain internals as far as I understand. 7-10 speed has the same inside dimensions.
Similar threads
- Locked
