Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

TECH NEWS

Are the benefits of 1x outweighed by the disadvantages? We asked, you answered

There's a lot of talk about 1x but do you want it on your bike?

We asked, you answered: Are the benefits of 1x outweighed by the disadvantages? And the results, well they are mixed, but one thing is clear, it’s an issue that divides opinion.

Why are we even talking about 1x on road bikes?

It’s the latest influence from the mountain bike world, along with geometry, disc brakes, wider tyres, threadless headsets, thru-axles, 650b, tubeless and suspension.

A couple of years ago the hot debate in road cycling was disc brakes, but now it’s all about how many chainrings you need and the future of the front mech. Mountain bikers have mostly ditched front mechs and two chainrings, and gravel riders aren’t far behind them, and some people and manufacturers have been experimenting with 1x on road bikes.

- Is the front mech dead? Is there a future for the front derailleur on modern road bikes?

It’s fair to say the results have been mixed. Probably the most high profile saga to shine a spotlight onto this debate was the ill-fated Aqua Blue Sport. Backed by 3T with its radical Strada, a bike entirely built around wide tyres, disc brakes and a 1x drivetrain, there was no way to fit a front mech.

While that team might have folded, there are still some attempts to bring 1x to to the pro race peloton. Trek-Segafredo has been trialling SRAM’s new Red eTap AXS groupset in 1x, and Mads Petersen is reportedly a fan. It all went very badly wrong for John Degenkolb though, as he dropped his chain in the final kilometres and wasn’t able contest the sprint.

For balance, it’s not like 2x isn’t without its issues. Wout Van Aert apparently got his chain jammed between the two chainrings on his Dura-Ace Di2 groupset whilst tackling the pivotal Arenberg cobbled sector in Paris-Roubaix recently, highlighting that mechanical issues can occur with any groupset. He was forced to swap bikes with a team mate.

ROTOR 1x13 - groupset.jpg

- 22 road, gravel and cyclocross bikes with 1X gearing – can one chainring do it all?

So what are the benefits to 1x and why is there so much interest in developing it when for the most part, 2x drivetrains have worked just fine for many years? Proponents of 1x speak of simplicity with one less component to fail, reduced weight and improved aero. But against it are complaints of reduced range and bigger gaps between the sprockets making it trickier to maintain a desired cadence.

So should we just leave it with the mountain bikes and gravel bikers or are the rewards worth the current trial and tribulation? At this point we hand over to the road.cc audience.  Here are some of the replies to the question we asked on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. If you’ve got an opinion do please share it in the comments down below.

 

Andy Jackson 2x for everything has you covered.

 

Elliott Hopkins It's this year's pressfit bottom bracket. #fad

 

iain_worrallo​ As soon as they can cram 22 cogs into a rear cassette, I'll try it.  1

 

mikecassie Hmm I’m not convinced, I’ve got it and it’s great for off road but when I’m on road mode I find the gearing jumps a bit big for me. I need the range too so…

 

Craig Hudson Love the benefits of all the range on one and cutting out the crap front shifter. Yes I get a few bigger jumps but it's far more efficient and reliable in my riding.

 

Steven Smith I've done this in my mountain bike. The answer is yes. One of the best things I've done.

 

Neil I agree it's not for the pros, but I've done Ventoux on 1x and doing faster speeds on my @3Tbike Strada than I ever did on my Trek Madone, makes me a believer that it can work for the masses. Don't knock it til you've tried it.

 

Marcus Elliott It very much depends. I'm comfortable at a range of cadences between 90-110rpm so I don't worry about the gaps in gears. All 3 of my bikes are 1x, but I think choosing appropriate chainrings and gears for the conditions and your abilities are more important.

 

Simon Tuck I was set on 1x for my new road bike. Ended up going with 2x because I do ride in groups quite a lot and the smaller jumps in ratio make it easier to settle on pace. If 1x was actually cheaper it would have been a no brainer though.

 

phuddy68​ The range of gears is fine, that’s not the problem with a 1x setup. The problem is that the jumps, on the current 1x11 are just too large; you’ll often find yourself ‘missing’ that perfect gear when trying to emulate a road bike. I found this out first hand after swapping some 28c tires onto my gravel bike and trying it out. The gearing as it has been isn’t right for road riding but I’m curious to see if the new 1x12 or the rotor 1x13 can make the sacrifice small enough that the 1x option becomes a viable alternative.

 

Demo Mateo Sorry, 2x for me. I would rather be pedalling 34/17 instead of 50/25. My chain will thank me for it. With a 1x you have no choice.

 

Alan Brenton It's not about range so much as the ability to fine tune cadence through greater ratio choice. I'd certainly consider it on a utility bike or heavy duty tourer though where simplicity might be more important.

 

Eric von Eckartsberg I’m mainly a gravel, mtb, and daily commute rider, and I have 1x on all my bikes. Used to ride some single speed, so 1x is a luxury now. If I was a true roadie I’d probably stick with a 2x, but the simplicity of 1x is worth it to me.

 

Ian Stuart It’s a answer to a question I never asked myself, fit what I need I’ll stick with 2x.

 

Ryan Maynard Eames Rode 1x for years, always chasing for the right gearing and never found it until I went back to 2x11.

 

Will Coleman Just get a compact and keep it in the big ring all the time until you need to climb

 

Paul Hardiman Another industry disaster as BB30

 

Ollie Howe CHOICE. Is what we want. I have both 2x and 1x. Love them both for different reasons. Personally I think 1x makes a lot more sense on a gravel bike or off road machines. Just look at the MTB world. Road bikes, however require a little more fine tuning in gearing and setup. It’s a much more precise world of accurate bike fit, correct cadence and number crunching, so I can also see why most people would opt for 2x on the road with much closer and precise ratios

 

Soeren Kuehling have sram rival 1x on the commuter bike, able to do 43kph on a flat road and more than enough gears (ratio) for hills..rolling on 35mm tyres

 

robscoths I've just come back from a fortnight riding a 1x in Mallorca. With a bit of pre-trip gear calculations online, I was able to get the same range as my old standard chain ring set up. Generally, riding solo was fine, once you get used to the bigger jumps between gears you can tailor your style a bit. The going only got tough on fast descents or pacy chainys. I'd spin out on the descent or get uncomfortably stuck overgearing when coming through for a turn.

 

Morgan Brown I doubt any of the above comments are from riders who own 1x bikes, but I have riden 1x in all sorts of terrain and I have just ordered another 1x bike. The advantage is that you don't have any duplicate gears, you don't have to have a front mech or double or triple chainsets so you can have a lower Q factor.

 

Chris Fanning When are Shimano going to make a 1x road groupset? It would really help at the budget end of the spectrum because STI levers and chainsets are the expensive and heavy bits. 46T x 11-34T is enough for most road bike buyers and it would be lighter, have a better chain-line most of the time, and be lower maintenance/fighter reliability. We're not all pro peloton riders!

 

cider_cyclist I run 1x on my Cinelli, it is a gravel bike but I use it on the roads as a road bike (prefer 32s in the winter). I have a 48T up front, matched with an XT 11 - 46 at the rear. I used a hanger extension and a medium caged R7000. Shifting is smooth, 48-46 is the same as a 36-34 that I ran on my semi compact. Yes 52 - 11 is a faster gear than 48 - 11 but I find I accelerate quicker and by the time I’m going 30+ (mph) I tend to stop pedalling and enjoy the speed

Summary

It’s clear the topic of 1x is one that divides opinion. Some people can see the advantage while many can’t see why there’s any point in switching from current 2x, some have embraced it for commuting and gravel bikes but prefer two chainrings on a road bike.

Which camp are you in, for or against 1x? Let’s here it below.

David worked on the road.cc tech team from 2012-2020. Previously he was editor of Bikemagic.com and before that staff writer at RCUK. He's a seasoned cyclist of all disciplines, from road to mountain biking, touring to cyclo-cross, he only wishes he had time to ride them all. He's mildly competitive, though he'll never admit it, and is a frequent road racer but is too lazy to do really well. He currently resides in the Cotswolds, and you can now find him over on his own YouTube channel David Arthur - Just Ride Bikes

Add new comment

33 comments

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds | 4 years ago
0 likes

If you like big jumps all the way through the range of ratios and enjoy chopping your cadence every gear shift which is horrible when you're transitioning on hills whether touring, doing a fast ride or MTB, aren't fussed about having either a really low gear or a really high gear and want to have that donkey penis look of the rear derailleur then 1x is for you.

if you don't then it's a shit 'solution' to a non problem.

ISomething like a 44/50 isn't low enough to get you up a technical and steep muddy climb on an MTB, in fact it's not low enough for touring in many instances. I've needed a 20-32 to get up some routes on the MTB and a few times 24/30 on the road bike has left me struggling. So then you compromise and get a smaller ring but then when on bits where you want to pedal but are over 30mph you're spinning like a whirling dervish.

On a road bike this is even worse because even for the low rolling hills of the Northern Home counties I can spin out on 50-11 in fact I was on 50-11 on a 1.5mile 2degree decline today.

We reached the solutions for very low and high gears and cutting out the jumps, there was provision for easy shifting to get all these gears and now we are retrograding ... it's because there's nowhere else to go for manufacturers but to come up with stuff that has no real benefit but is touted by the manufacturers and the likes of road CC, GCN et al that it's what we need and that it's a viable option , then point to the fact that there was a win by a rider using xx/zz that it must be true/must need.

I'll be sticking with triples/doubles for my bikes until I can no longer get my leg over OR they come up with an affordable 16/17 speed internal hub gear that can replicate a triple/double range as needed without the big feck off jumps and can still be built into a racing wheel, that would literally be the only way to get me to use a 1x system.

 

Avatar
Markopic | 4 years ago
1 like

What a useless debate. Any drivetrain on a bicycle is a matter of compromises and goals that bike designer (or buyer) wants to achieve.
I have both MTB and road bikes with 1x and 2x setup, and I can not say that any of them is absolutelly better than the other. Some of my observations:

- 1x is much easier to maintain and clean - just remove the chain from the chain ring and you can perfectly clean the chainring. Rear wheel removal is also easier.
- With 1x it is easier to achieve gear ratio below 1:1 - for example, on my gravel bike I have 38t chainring with 10-42 on the back. To achieve such ratio, sub compact chainring must be used on 2x
- Amount of jumps between gears on 1x are related to the chainring size and cassette spread - no one is prevented of running 36t (or smaller, depending on frame) chainring and 10-28 or 10-30 cassette.
- Eagle MTB 1x drivetrains work really great
- If a rider knows how to use front derailleur on 2x, it can be used for quicker gear changes than 1x can achieve
- Properly setup 2x drivetrain (I have experience only with mechanical) has no significant problems or drawbacks compared to 1x - but it really must be properly setup, or there are chain rub issues
- Narrow/Wide chainrings on 1x are commonly more silent than 2x (although properly clean and properly setup 2x is also very silent)
- Ive had chain falloffs only on 2x, never on 1x (all my bikes are without chainguards).

Avatar
crazy-legs | 4 years ago
0 likes

If I was building a specific crit racing bike (you know, if money was no object and I could have a bike for every purpose) then it would absolutely be 1x. 50T chainring and a close range 11-21 cassette would be perfect for the kind of intense 1hr + 5 lap style blasts around flattish circuits. Even something like Otley or Durham would be do-able on that.

1x is also really good is for kids, especially in Youth racing where gears are limited so you simply don't need the range.

For real world where I don't have unlimited sums of money and storage space for hundreds of bikes, 2x still represents best value for me at the moment and allows the bike to do everything from racing to lightweight (bikepacking style) touring to leisure rides and Sportives.

Having said that, I think an awful lot of people out there, even quite experienced cyclists, often have little concept of how to use their gears or the best gear for any given situation. It comes down to things like reading the road and terrain, maybe even the weather as well (judging when you'll get a faceful of headwind as the road turns a corner for example) - in my time of ride leading and guiding, chain breakage is the second most common mechanical after punctures simply due to the complete inability of a lot of people to judge when to change gears, what gear they should be in and to change without putting too much force through the pedals. You also get the power warriors who want to be in 52-11 the whole time and then have to bang down 16 gears at once when they come to a hill.

If you're in the 36-11, you should probably have changed up to the 52-16 before then. Although a single 48T chainring would still give you that gear in the 15T sprocket and you'd still have room each side to play with (unlike in the 2x example of 36/52 and 11-28 where if you're in 36-11, you can only go down one way or a massive jump up onto the big ring followed by several clicks down at the back).

 

Avatar
OrangeRidley | 4 years ago
0 likes

1x for anything off road because it’s simpler, more reliable, clogs less and cadence is less important. Also for hill climbs (only need one ring) and slay TTs and cries where you’d never use the little ring anyway. But with only 11 sprockets I’ll stick to my 2x for the Yorkshire bergs. With 12 or 13 in the future though; who knows?

Avatar
twowheelbob | 4 years ago
0 likes

I'm experimenting with an Absolute Black 44T oval front ring and 11/30 cassette on my Addict for the hell of it. It seems fine so far, will have to wait and see how I cope with a hilly 100 mile Sportive and the Isle of Wight randonee.
I tend to ride my own pace so don't notice any big gaps. The oval ring certainly seems to help, not sure I'd do this without it.

Avatar
StraelGuy replied to twowheelbob | 4 years ago
0 likes

twowheelbob wrote:

I'm experimenting with an Absolute Black 44T oval front ring and 11/30 cassette on my Addict for the hell of it. It seems fine so far, will have to wait and see how I cope with a hilly 100 mile Sportive and the Isle of Wight randonee. I tend to ride my own pace so don't notice any big gaps. The oval ring certainly seems to help, not sure I'd do this without it.

 

So you're pleased with the Absolute black oval ring? I was reading the reviews on their site this morning and everybody raves about how good they are.

Avatar
Jimthebikeguy.com replied to StraelGuy | 4 years ago
2 likes
StraelGuy wrote:

twowheelbob wrote:

I'm experimenting with an Absolute Black 44T oval front ring and 11/30 cassette on my Addict for the hell of it. It seems fine so far, will have to wait and see how I cope with a hilly 100 mile Sportive and the Isle of Wight randonee. I tend to ride my own pace so don't notice any big gaps. The oval ring certainly seems to help, not sure I'd do this without it.

 

So you're pleased with the Absolute black oval ring? I was reading the reviews on their site this morning and everybody raves about how good they are.

They are ok, i guess - i have one on my bike, it looks sexy, dont know if it adds performance really.

Avatar
twowheelbob | 4 years ago
0 likes

I'm experimenting with an Absolute Black 44T oval front ring and 11/30 cassette on my Addict for the hell of it. It seems fine so far, will have to wait and see how I cope with a hilly 100 mile Sportive and the Isle of Wight randonee.
I tend to ride my own pace so don't notice any big gaps. The oval ring certainly seems to help, not sure I'd do this without it.

Avatar
matthewn5 | 4 years ago
0 likes

Don't feel strongly about 1x, if you like it fine, but don't try to convince me that 2x isn't perfectly serviceable and convenient. For instance, on my commuter, on the move I'm usually in 53x19 or 53x17, come to the lights and I can drop into the small ring on the front with a single click, take off again and be back up to speed in a single click. So easy, rather than chasing up and down the block on my OH's 1x bike (which I've sometimes borrowed).

As for reliability, set it up properly and there aren't any issues. There's just about nothing to go wrong! I've sometimes wondered whether I could set up a fixed rear sprocket and only use a front mech for the commuter. Maybe with a triple? It could be all you practically need for stop-start riding

Avatar
mikeymustard replied to matthewn5 | 4 years ago
3 likes

matthewn5 wrote:

 

....... I've sometimes wondered whether I could set up a fixed rear sprocket and only use a front mech for the commuter. Maybe with a triple? It could be all you practically need for stop-start riding

@matthewn5 what you're looking for is a sturmey archer 3 speed - quite popular on town bikes for the last 90 years or so  1

Avatar
bikeandy61 | 4 years ago
0 likes

Each to their own I say. As mentioned elsewhere my only issue would be lack of choice from manufacturers. As long as I can choose to buy 1x, 2x or 3x and as long as "Off the shelf" frames can still be purchased that allow front mech and cabling I'm happy and will stay so.

Avatar
mattsccm | 4 years ago
2 likes

Trouble is with a single chain ring is that it is really a soluton to a problem that isn't there. I don't accept the simplicity issue.

First, coping with a front mech/changer is bloody easy. If you can't do that then I doubt other things are possible. As I doubt people actually see this as an issue I think its either a red herring or some people are really thick.

Second, the front mech is the simplest moving part on a bike. It's almost impossible to screw it up, even off road. The alternative, a clutch rear mech is way more complex. It has more parts and is long and vunerable. Seen plenty of them damaged, at great cost, but no front mechs. All right, I am not a long time rider, having only started with the club in 1979 but I reckon I would have seen one in 40 years of MTB and road. Shall I mention the trend to stick a totally pointless dropper seat post in instead?

Third. Weight is mentioned. it won't be much in it and the average MTB/gravel rider carries so much junk that this is irrelevant. 

Fourth. It encourages cross chaining. Mechanically a poor idea. Can't deny that one. 

Fifth . Small sprockets etc wear faster as well as being inefficient. Bad for the pocket and the environment.

Sixth. Gappy transmission. Maybe not noticed by those who are new to the game or coming from MTB which is very "faddy" and trendy. They not better. 

I have tried  a single ring. It worked for CX (as in CX not messing about off road)  but did encourage cross chaining . Same for TT's on flat courses where only 3 or 4 sprockets are used.  

Summary. Marketing and gulible punters. 

Avatar
shufflingb replied to mattsccm | 4 years ago
0 likes

mattsccm wrote:

Trouble is with a single chain ring is that it is really a soluton to a problem that isn't there. I don't accept the simplicity issue.

First, coping with a front mech/changer is bloody easy. If you can't do that then I doubt other things are possible. As I doubt people actually see this as an issue I think its either a red herring or some people are really thick.

Second, the front mech is the simplest moving part on a bike. It's almost impossible to screw it up, even off road. The alternative, a clutch rear mech is way more complex. It has more parts and is long and vunerable. Seen plenty of them damaged, at great cost, but no front mechs. All right, I am not a long time rider, having only started with the club in 1979 but I reckon I would have seen one in 40 years of MTB and road. Shall I mention the trend to stick a totally pointless dropper seat post in instead?

Third. Weight is mentioned. it won't be much in it and the average MTB/gravel rider carries so much junk that this is irrelevant. 

Fourth. It encourages cross chaining. Mechanically a poor idea. Can't deny that one. 

Fifth . Small sprockets etc wear faster as well as being inefficient. Bad for the pocket and the environment.

Sixth. Gappy transmission. Maybe not noticed by those who are new to the game or coming from MTB which is very "faddy" and trendy. They not better. 

I have tried  a single ring. It worked for CX (as in CX not messing about off road)  but did encourage cross chaining . Same for TT's on flat courses where only 3 or 4 sprockets are used.  

Summary. Marketing and gulible punters. 

 

So ...

 

Q1) Unless perfect,  human beings,  will occasionally select the wrong gear a certain percentage of the time (perhaps more when the newbies and less with many years of experience). Regardless,  does having two places where it can be got "wrong" increase or decrease the likelihood of getting it "wrong" for non-perfect individuals?

Q2) Again, assuming a non-perfect individual has gotten themselves into the wrong gear. Is it easier for them to fix it if they only need to make a change in one place or two? Is it easier to fix if that change is at the rear particularly when under load?

Q3) A front mech with its associated brake and gear changing lever on the handlebar, its frameset that needs mounting accommodation, cable routing either through or on the outside of the frame, around the bottom bracket so that it aligns just "so" with the pull arm on the front derailleur. The front derailleur in turn that needs to be installed at the right height above the front chainring and to then have its cable tension adjusted so that it indexes and doesn't rub on either the outer or inner plates of the chainrings at the extremities of front mech and the rear derailleur's operation.  Is the front mech simpler than the alternative of just having a single ring and no front mech? Is it as asserted, the simplest moving part of the bike?

(if it makes any difference, clutches are already on 2x)

Q4) Do dropper posts and what mountain bike riders carry around with them have anything to do with the weight, or any other merits, of 1x and 2x systems?

Q5) On an 11 speed rear cassette, maximum chain deflection from a centrally aligned 1x chainring is about 5.5 rear cog widths. On a 2x it's about  5 or 6 rear cogs depending on when changing on the front occurs to avoid cross chaining.  Is it better to have optimal chain alignment in the middle of the rear cassette or at the extremities? On the rear, where do people spend their most time riding? How is 1x's 5.5 deflection worse than a 2x's 5 or 6?

Q6) Accusing other cyclists who prefer a 1x system of being gullible punters who have fallen for marketing hype is: A) Somewhat impolite?  B) Indicative of a mindset that has grown so used to a particular system that it now struggles to understand its weaknesses and that there are other points of view? C) All of the above?

3x, 2x, 1x, Rohloff,  fixies, whatever, ride what you like and have a great weekend folks.

Avatar
madcarew | 4 years ago
0 likes

I've tried 1x road bike for a short trial ride. I use a fairly narrow cadence range (88 - 100) generally, and especially for hill climbing (not my forte), the gaps at the big end of the range were really too big. I know that was the experience of some of the aqua blue riders. Like others, I don't understand the 'reliability' comments regarding front mechs. I have had my current one on my bike for 8 years. I haven't adjusted it since day 1. It works every single time. In 35 years of racing I have had 2 front chain shippngs that cost either the race, or contact with the breakaway. I've had more than that from rear gears. The weight I think is a non-issue, but for me, and I suspect the racing majority (not many have a completely effective 25 rpm cadence range) that 2X remains the likely option. Having said that, a 14 speed cluster will blow all the cadence arguments out of the water. 

When I started racing, we raced 42/52 and a six speed block (13-19) was the standard. So actually  a 46 X 11-21 would give you a greater range, with no jumps at all. However, we have moved on from those days...

Avatar
bigbiker101 | 4 years ago
1 like

Never ever have any issues with my front mech, I have both electronic (Ultegra) and Manual (105), they work perfectly every single time, I've used the 1x and the gaps are crap, zero benefit and I will be sticking to the 2x, far more flexibility for road riding.

1x will die on the road as not enough folk will buy it to justify the development of it

Avatar
srchar | 4 years ago
5 likes

I don't understand the hate for front mechs. My commute bike has a Veloce front mech that cost all of £20 and doesn't need to be trimmed at all.

I wonder how many people just have front mechs that are poorly adjusted and/or have cables seized from lack of use.

Avatar
Luca Patrono | 4 years ago
3 likes

I've viewed 1x as a fad that SRAM push hard because they have chosen to define themselves by it. Front mechs can occasionally go wrong, but a 2x system provides both range and good steps between gears. 1x road is a solution in search of a problem, and if things were the other way around - we had been running 1x systems because the front derailleur was somehow a difficult piece of technology to implement - then we would be talking about how front mechs made flawed, gappy, chain line destroying 1x systems obsolete on road. Predicting a front derailleur shift is basic riding, and front derailleur cables need changing what, twice a year? I don't buy the simplicity arguments and there is nothing remotely appealing about 1x road to me.

I should note that I live in a hilly region.

Avatar
Xavier Kougat | 4 years ago
0 likes

There is no one perfect set up for everyone or every scenario for the same person, obviously. I have a number of different set ups, including 1x, SRAM eTap 12 speed, SRAM eTap 11 speed, Shimano Di2, Campy mechanical 12 speed, Campy mechanical 11 speed, and some Eroica down friction tube shifters.  If I had to choose one bike it would be with the Campy 12 speed mechanical because I always feel I can get just the right cadence and without larger jumps. It is true, as others have stated that 1xs have larger jumps, and I road an old Merlin with one yesterday where the jumps were noticeable but I loved not worrying about whether to use the small front chain ring or not: I can just focus on pushing forward. There is a simplicity to 1xs that allows me to focus more on the task at hand, but for smoothness I will take the Campy 12 speed mechanical over everything. 

Avatar
don simon fbpe replied to Xavier Kougat | 4 years ago
1 like

Xavier Kougat wrote:

There is no one perfect set up for everyone or every scenario for the same person, obviously. I have a number of different set ups, including 1x, SRAM eTap 12 speed, SRAM eTap 11 speed, Shimano Di2, Campy mechanical 12 speed, Campy mechanical 11 speed, and some Eroica down friction tube shifters.  If I had to choose one bike it would be with the Campy 12 speed mechanical because I always feel I can get just the right cadence and without larger jumps. It is true, as others have stated that 1xs have larger jumps, and I road an old Merlin with one yesterday where the jumps were noticeable but I loved not worrying about whether to use the small front chain ring or not: I can just focus on pushing forward. There is a simplicity to 1xs that allows me to focus more on the task at hand, but for smoothness I will take the Campy 12 speed mechanical over everything. 

Obviously.

Avatar
Xavier Kougat replied to don simon fbpe | 4 years ago
1 like

don simon fbpe wrote:

Xavier Kougat wrote:

There is no one perfect set up for everyone or every scenario for the same person, obviously. I have a number of different set ups, including 1x, SRAM eTap 12 speed, SRAM eTap 11 speed, Shimano Di2, Campy mechanical 12 speed, Campy mechanical 11 speed, and some Eroica down friction tube shifters.  If I had to choose one bike it would be with the Campy 12 speed mechanical because I always feel I can get just the right cadence and without larger jumps. It is true, as others have stated that 1xs have larger jumps, and I road an old Merlin with one yesterday where the jumps were noticeable but I loved not worrying about whether to use the small front chain ring or not: I can just focus on pushing forward. There is a simplicity to 1xs that allows me to focus more on the task at hand, but for smoothness I will take the Campy 12 speed mechanical over everything. 

Obviously.

Glad you like the Campy 12 speed mechanical too, don simon fbpe

Avatar
The Gavalier replied to Xavier Kougat | 4 years ago
0 likes

Xavier Kougat wrote:

don simon fbpe wrote:

Xavier Kougat wrote:

There is no one perfect set up for everyone or every scenario for the same person, obviously. I have a number of different set ups, including 1x, SRAM eTap 12 speed, SRAM eTap 11 speed, Shimano Di2, Campy mechanical 12 speed, Campy mechanical 11 speed, and some Eroica down friction tube shifters.  If I had to choose one bike it would be with the Campy 12 speed mechanical because I always feel I can get just the right cadence and without larger jumps. It is true, as others have stated that 1xs have larger jumps, and I road an old Merlin with one yesterday where the jumps were noticeable but I loved not worrying about whether to use the small front chain ring or not: I can just focus on pushing forward. There is a simplicity to 1xs that allows me to focus more on the task at hand, but for smoothness I will take the Campy 12 speed mechanical over everything. 

Obviously.

Glad you like the Campy 12 speed mechanical too, don simon fbpe

Obviously can’t afford the new 13sp Rotor groupset

Avatar
shufflingb | 4 years ago
0 likes

Downsides; 1x can be a  bit gappy at the moment for finding optimal cadence when on the road if using a wide-range rear cassette.

Upsides. No more trying to persuade a front derailleur not to rub.  No more finding yourself in the wrong gear on the front with the chain under load and having to pray to the cycling gods that it'll change down rather than dumping the chain (and you). Fewer chain drops in general. One less cable to change. Simpler to use (try explaining how to get a lower gear by changing down on the front and up on the rear to a beginner). Lighter.

Hmm sides. Theoretically, chains might wear more quickly or suck a few more Watts on a 1x system because of the chain line. However, I've noticed neither, and there doesn't seem to be a clear consensus as to if it's a real problem on the internet either. Frankly, it's possible that with suitable, undoubtedly more expensive, engineering neither should be an issue on a 1x setup but we'll leave it as a hmm for the moment.

For me 1x is the way to go. With the emergence of 12 and 13 speed rear cassettes, it's only going to become more compelling. Each to their own though.

 

Avatar
hopster | 4 years ago
0 likes

1x for over 3 years and it works for the riding I like which mainly consists of gravel riding and bikepacking with an occasional road ride. I like the simplicity, no front mech, cable and shifter to maintain. Gaps on my 1x11 are fine for me, although I've been eyeing up the new Force AXS 1x12 and Rotor 1x13 lately. 

I personally can't see myself ever owning a bike with a front mech ever again for the riding I enjoy. 1x isn't for everyone and I appreciate that and I'm not here to convert anyone. People will moan about the larger jump in the gears and the lack of range but none of that has bothered me.  On occasion I think about one lower 'bail out' gear when I'm bikepacking, hence looking at a possible upgrade, but its still a luxury and I can quite happily manage on the existing gear range.

Its all riding bikes, who cares what people ride as long as it suits them. Bikes should be available with both options. 1x is super easy to use for novice riders to get their heads round and if it means more people get out then thats a good thing. 2x for people who want more range and I'm not sure why some people get so defensive about using one or the other.  However triple chainsets, god please ban those!  3

 

Avatar
WBoy | 4 years ago
4 likes

Nobody seems to be bothered about the durability issues - dreadful chainlines etc.

Avatar
madcarew replied to WBoy | 4 years ago
1 like

WBoy wrote:

Nobody seems to be bothered about the durability issues - dreadful chainlines etc.

Because there are none. Cross chaining with modern chains is a non-issue, besides, on 1X the chain ring is in the middle of the position of the chainrings of a 2X so has less cross chaining than a 2X set up. It is a total non-issue.

Avatar
Jimthebikeguy.com | 4 years ago
0 likes

For mtb, especially trail and enduro, then yep. For xc, then yep (as long as you arent too racy and obsess over cadence). For cx, yep because unless the course features a tarmac section, you hardly need any gears. For gravel, road and touring and everything else... I think SRAM pushed this really hard 4yrs ago but even they are rowing back a bit, as the new etap stuff still features a front mech. Shimano haven't followed them on it, which would have really helped, and the fact that we are still only just at 12spd for road (you'd need about 15 cogs i reckon to kill off the cadence problem, whilst getting the range), means not yet for the masses. The best present option, i think, is where praxis have noticed the market gap and have started producing subcompact (48/32 or 46/30) chainsets, which sit beautifully with the ultegra rx rear mech, which in turn works with an 11-34 or bigger. Theres your range, your pleasing shift quality, and your cadence. Watch this space, as something is coming from shimano however....

Avatar
Mungecrundle | 4 years ago
7 likes

Personally I'd only be for or against something if it was being foisted on me as the only available option. Where I live (too flat), given the type of riding I do and my personal physiology, my inner chainring is pretty much vestigial, but my experiences and preferences are not the same as other people.

Fixed, 1x 2x 3x, Rohloff, electric assisted, rim or disc brake, carbon, steel, aluminium, titanium, mtb, gravel, cargo, race, lightweight, aero, suspension, saddle shape, bar tape preference, colour..."Vive la difference" I say.

Avatar
lees69 | 4 years ago
0 likes

46/34 (from a comment above) is effectively a 34/22 isn't it? Up here in the Pennies I wouldn't have a chance! Plus I'd be spinning out all over the place with 46/11. Any move down on the front is just eating your speed!

I'll stick with 2x for the road bike. I would consider it on the cross bike, but with something much smaller on the front, perhaps a 34/30, hang on, I've already got that, and the bonus of a 46/11 for faster stuff!

And before you dismiss me I have got 1x SLX 32-11/46 on my hardtail, I like it a lot, but I think it's the 29" 2.35 tyres and dropper post that make it so good,  not the 1x, and I spin out on it a lot! I also never had any issues with 3x on my old full sus bike.... 

I do like the clean look and less places for mud to get stuck (which isn't an issue on the road) but the range just isn't there, or you don't like going fast.

Avatar
lesterama | 4 years ago
3 likes

I hate front mechs for their lack of reliability and having to adjust for chain-rub. I have a 1x road bike that I use most of the time when riding alone. I love it. I have 40T front, having sacrificed the big gears for smaller jumps.

I am dreaming of a 1x bike just for crits. I will always have a 2x road bike for hilly races and harder group rides, though.

Avatar
ktache | 4 years ago
0 likes

Both my mountain bikes, which are my sole form of transport, are both 26 inch rim brake, both 3X, everyday- cantilever, XT 3x7 (8 on the casette but sacrifice one for the STIs) other good- ceramic Vs 3x9 XTR.  I am a utility and commuting rider and I also like to get out there occasionally.  My last commute featured road, canal, gravel, filth and offroad hills, and I use all of my gears, sometimes wishing for more.  Now the modern mountain bike is a technological floaty marvel, and if I had the money, a driving licence and a car, I might get one, as it seems to me that generally these beautiful machines are designed to be driven to where you want to ride.  Not exclusively of course, but I have no real wish to be spinning out on flat tarmac, so I can still climb the hills offroad.  I like the smaller jumps, but understand the added hastle of the 3 on the front, and figured out only fairly recently that I needed to ditch the macho bullshit and get in the granny early, for the big ups and the exteme filth.

To get to Swinley, which is great, I have fast and busy road blast to get to the station, train to Crowthorn, road, tarmac and dirt cycle route to get to the Look Out.  No car park for me, and so no restriction for me to finish riding early in the winter.  To get to the start of the Ridgeway, train to Pewsey, the about 10 mile on road before the offroad starts.  I think I have only ever been driven twice to go mountain biking (in 27 years), more of a solo rider me, and having my good bike strapped to the outside of a car filled me with horror.

The new build will be a Rohloff.  I hope it's worth it, gave it to the LBS last June.

Pages

Latest Comments