Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Really Good Video on Why 1X Drivetrains Are Bad For Racing [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom A. wrote:
...but, on the other hand, ALL of my bikes have front derailleurs and I have ZERO issues with them nor dropped chains...

^^^ THIS ^^^

As a cyclist I will always have a front derailleur on my bike. Even if I ever do go to a 1x setup. That way if I do drop my chain, I can at least attempt to get it back on the ring without having to stop and dismount. It's more of a security blanket for me than anything else. For example: At this years elite criterium national championships a rider in the break of four dropped his chain with five laps to go. He was unable to remount his chain without stopping on the side of the course. Needless to say his race was over at that point.
Quote Reply
Re: Really Good Video on Why 1X Drivetrains Are Bad For Racing [kileyay] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
kileyay wrote:
OddSlug wrote:
I don't think that is what is happening. The original statement here totally dismisses 1x. I think most 1x people here are just defending it's place, which would be as a valid option alongside 2x. I haven't read anyone dismiss 2x but I may of missed that. Support of 1x might sound over the top but you have to put that in the context of the original post.

Personally I think 2x is the safer choice that will work for a wider range of riding. You should think about your ratios if you are going 1x. But I don't think 1x limits your range as much as some might assume without doing the research. Both have their place but every time cassettes get more speeds the utility of 1x increases.


When you put it like that...

But no. I think you and many others missed the point of the original statement, which was made by someone who has clearly been around here a long time and is now posting under a new handle pretending to be dumb. The OP was written to stir up the 1x mafia and inflame their emotions about the great drivetrain debate of our time. And stir up/inflame it did. It was a pretty solid troll and indictment of a movement that has taken on more dogma than it, in my opinion, should.

You might have to explain that to me in different words. I think most people get he's trolling. What would be the correct response to an overstated, inflammatory statement if not to refute the points made while making it clear you don't think it is matter you need to be partisan about? If some 1x posts are over the top here then maybe address them individually, I'm only talking in general.
Quote Reply
Re: Really Good Video on Why 1X Drivetrains Are Bad For Racing [kileyay] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
kileyay wrote:
Tom A. wrote:
Well...it might be because we're starting to see bikes designed to ONLY allow for 1X (see 3T Strada), and some might be worrying it's the next "road disc brake" or "thru axle" type push that although in the short term increases choice, eventually decreases choice (see "26 inch MTB wheels/tires")...


I think you're reaching on this one. The analog you should draw is to the demise of the mountain bike front derailleur, which actually seems to have been a consumer-demand driven phenomenon that won out on the merits of the product offering, not by the push of industry. Choice was not diminished. SRAM bet on the XD driver with a 10T cog going up to 42T and Shimano bet on Synchroshift di2 tech. We know who won that one.

Well...don't forget that a BIG part of the push for 1X on MTBs was the fact that with 29er and 650B wheels becoming "vogue", it got harder and harder to just fit a front derailleur in there while trying to maintain reasonable geometries, especially on full suspension rigs. That, IMO was the biggest driver...everything else about that was just rationalizations ;-)


Quote:
There is one bike out there that doesn't have a mount for an FD hanger, but that also seems to be part of a specific strategy to shift the 1x paradigm to 12 speed or 13 speed drive train via a unicorn freehub body. The bet from 3T seems to be that a 10T with 12 and 13 speeds is the tipping point for 1x to go from a niche use case to widespread adoption, and putting these eggs in the XDR basket without larger industry players on board seems tantamount to Specialized's experimentation of the 135mm thru axle standard in the 2016 cx frames.

I'm not betting against 3T either, even though it's a ballsy move to be a first mover here. But in general, regarding the Strada and the removal of the FD hanger -- this was their logic:

Bikerumor wrote:
The biggest new thinking is about the clutter around the crankset with water bottles, front derailleurs and two chainrings. All of that blocks wind and forces air to go wider, all the way out around the legs. Getting rid of the front derailleur and small chainring lets air flow around the seat tube, between it and the chainring, keeping it more streamlined against the bike.


I call bullshit. I want to see the test rig that determined that the front derailleur was pushing all that air around the legs, which is something different than rappstar is saying in this thread. Or are we in CFD la la land at this point? This goes back to what Heath was saying about how there's all this turbulent air down there, which probably renders any test data without pedaling legs next to useless.

Yeah...I'm pretty skeptical on that claim as well. I'm also skeptical that being able to include a FD mount would compromise the frame design somehow...especially after seeing the frame section in that location.

My guess is the REAL reason they wanted to go solely 1X on the Strada was to allow them to use a shorter chainstay length (405mm IIRC) than they otherwise could with a disc rear wheel. Without going 1X, they couldn't go that short without causing chainline issues...as evidenced by Specialized's "non standard" derailleur hanger and rear hub on their Tarmac Disc. AFAIK, both Shimano and SRAM do not recommend using their 2X setups on disc bikes with chainstays that short.

Quote:
The only way it makes sense to remove the FD hanger on new gen aero bikes is to actually prove the above point (as relayed by Bikerumor) and to convince 2x-inclined consumers of it. Otherwise as a manufacturer, you eliminate choice and by extension reduce your potential customer base, which just won't make sense for most companies.

Yup, as I pointed out earlier...I think Specialized quickly learned how appealing (or not) a 1X only version of a bike was when they first came out with the Allez Sprint. A version with a FD hanger wasn't long in following...

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Really Good Video on Why 1X Drivetrains Are Bad For Racing [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I love the idea of the simplicity of a 1x system. Every time I think I've executed the perfect "front-downshift, rear-triple-upshift combination" on the road bike, only to bog because I actually just trimmed down the front, I want to chuck the whole 2x system in the can. But, truth be told, double chainsets and close ratio cassettes have turned me into a cadence whore. I'm happy to chug along at any cadence.....as long as it's somewhere between 88 and 98. Unfortunately, I lack the power that would be required to stay in my happy cadence range with a 1x system, given the jumps in gearing. When I get on my old 90's era mountain-bike-turned-adventure-cruiser with a 3x7 drivetrain, I lament the cassette gearing gaps, even on the smallish middle chainring.

I've decided my next road bike will either have SRAM with a Yaw FD or Di2 with SynchroShift. I'll stick with 2x on the tri bike, as well, for the same reasons (cadence sensitivity + moderate power output), but, since there's no FD trim and the potential "trim when I meant to downshift" botch isn't a concern, I see no urgent reason to replace the Shimano mechanical groupset.

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"
Last edited by: gary p: Jul 11, 17 16:12
Quote Reply
Re: Really Good Video on Why 1X Drivetrains Are Bad For Racing [Hybridlete] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hybridlete wrote:
DFW_Tri wrote:
What can be one simple that only having to shift on one side??? Simplicity is a main reason I went to 1x. Have not experienced any of the problems you have expressed concerns about. But to each his own.


With 1X you need to buy and maintain two bikes for what I can easily do with my lone 2X bike. Not so simple.

you need to buy and maintain 2 bikes anyway (or in my case 5)

____________________________________

Are you ready to do an Ultraman? | How I calculate Ironman race fueling | Strength Training for Athletes |
Quote Reply

Prev Next