Hills!

Brockway Summit at IMLT comes to mind.

It sounds like a solution in search of a problem to me. If it is flat enough that the small ring isn't needed then the weight penalty doesn't matter. If it is hilly enough to make the weight advantage attractive then the lack of gear range is discouraging. As others point out, wind can mess up the plan too. I could see this for some very flat events where it is inconceivable that the small ring would be used. When I was doing some road riding in South Carolina near the coast last month I didn't touch my small ring once.

I have raced (road races/crits) in my very young days (early 70's) on both a single speed freewheel as well as a 5 speed cluster. (single chain ring up front). Most of the time the single chain ring worked ok, but if you hit some bumps while putting power down... the chain did have a tendency to come off....at the worst times....after it happened in an important race, my parents bought me a custom road bike.....so it was a win in the long run...lol

---

http://www.TomMoschettoFitness.com
Cycling Coach/Trainer/Motorpacing/Computrainer Rental

I think the guys behind Dimond are promoting a single ring set up, at least for some race situations.
Less drag is the main benefit.

I agree on a flat to rolling course, riding with a 50-34 and 11-28 in the rear, I'm only using the 50 with 11-25 in the back (never get into the 28). That is a 2:1 ration (50:25). when I started riding we were on a 5 speed cassette so only 10 gears back then albeit on a slightly wider range than the above. I really like never having to get into the small ring and back to the big on rollers.

One the course has more than 5-6% grades I need the small ring for sure. In any case the 50-34 with 11-28 and I have all the gearing I need for pretty well every triathlon course under the sun. I could use the same gearing from Eagleman to Alpe d'Huez tri.

Dev

Well...

I have a single on my MTB. And, I have thought of going with a single for CX.

But, I would say that for a TT, the double x 10 or 11 is the way to go. Getting the most out of a given power/cadence at each instant is of value during a TT event.

I know for myself that I am switching gears way, way more often on my TT bike than I am even on the road. I guess I'd say that the closer gear ratios are of an advantage. This is pretty much why I stay with the double for CX when I'm pretty sure in practice most CX course would allow me to run a single.

---

---

Twitter @achtervolger

Sram just announced the Force cyclocross 1x11 setup and it includes up to 46t chainrings.

I think 1x11 is pretty appealing for general road riding/training, but in a race situation, I'd be worried about being over geared.

Although, my road and tri bike are currently 53/39, with a 12/26; a 46t with an 11/32 would be a better range.

Don't forget too, that any course with uphills also has downhills. You need to ideally apply 80-90% of your target power even on downhills. So any miniscule time savings from weight (Why do triathletes even care) would be lost by a higher VI and lower average power.

Triathletes need to mostly ignore any advice, myths, preconceptions, etc from road bicycle racing. A road bike race is NOT a TT. Fundamentally, racing a clock in a not draft legal TT, is completely different from a draft legal race for position were the finish time is mostly irrelevant other than you relative time gap to other competitors in stage racing. An age group triathlete could be very successful having never, ever produced more than 400Watts or hell maybe even 350W peak during training or racing. A CAT 5 racer would get killed other than timing a break away perfectly off a long steep climb late in a race or on a technical course.

---

TrainingBible Coaching
http://www.trainingbible.com

11-30? Not for me thanks. That's pretty much 2 teeth gap between cogs? Nah. In an ideal world, a straigh block at the back (1 tooth difference between cogs) would be far nicer for riding, with shifting a 2/3 front chainring as needed.

While a single chainring and wide spaced cassette has its uses, for me, riding a double chainring with decent tooth differences works just fine. A 11-30 tooth cog out the back also means a giant rear deraillieur cage. Hardly worth the effort when a 12-25, with compact crankset covers all but the most extreme uphill, flat or downhill situations for 99.38% of road riders around the world.

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

Haha that's the first thing I thought of as well when I read the thread title. But wasn't the main reason Millar's chain slipped was because someone on his team had the brilliant idea of taking off the FD to save weight? I think they canned one of the DS's on his team (Cofidis) after that.

My first Tri of the season, which for me, is a relatively flat course, still has one hill at 16% for a few hundred meters. Before and after that it is 8% and there is another hill at 8% as well. Even though I'm on a compact crank, I still use all gears.

---

BC Don
Pain is temporary, not giving it your all lasts all Winter.

There is really no benefit to this. Basically what you will end up doing is spending a bunch of money to replace stuff you already have with stuff that isn't as versatile as what you had before. You'll have bigger jumps between gears and what will you really gain?

Even for a flat TT like in Sattley, CA all you really gain is the weight savings of a single small chainring. On a flat TT. You can't safely take off the front derailleur (see my David Millar video elsewhere in the thread). So you save probably 50-60 grams and lose the ability to cruise around while warming up in a reasonable gear at a reasonable cadence.

Total. Waste. Of. Time.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

Agree that spending a bunch of money to change a bike to a 1x is silly. I did it with a Wolf Tooth chainring and my LBS gave me some chainring bolt spacers. Oh and I bought a torx bit.

But having commuted and raced CX a few times on a 1x10, it is unlikely that I will purchase another front derailleur in the future. Ever?

Wife has Di2 on her road bike and the front shifting is amazing. But still sucks compared to any rear shift I have made. Dura Ace, Red, Tiagra, etc.

---

/kj

http://kjmcawesome.tumblr.com/

Not unless I lived and raced in Florida year round or if I only raced short course. For long course, it would work at a course like Texas, but definitely not Louisville or any others with a decent grade hill. Narrow gaps are also very important for hitting a target power range within an optimum cadence range.

---

-Bryan Journey
Travel Blog | Training Blog | Facebook Page

I was thinking of doing this, until I actually did the math.

I calculated that if I changed from my current 2x10 SRAM Red set-up to the best spec SRAM 1x10 / 11 setup (new crankset and chainrig, new Wi-FLi RD and 11-32 cassette), I would save a huge 62g in weight. This includes the loss of weight from the FD and assuming losing 100g for the front shifter cable.

This is mostly because the best spec 11-32 casette SRAM currently makes weighs around 100g more than a 11-25 Red cassette. So changing to the bigger casette acutally results in a weight gain, even after removing the FD!

From a weight perspective, right now there is just no real benefit to going 1x on a road bike. Changing all that stuff and having worse gear ratios for 62g just makes no sense.

Obviously this does not account for the aero cost of some cable, FD and extra chainring for keeping a 2x set up. Would be interested if there have been any aero studies on a 1x vs 2x setup.

I was thinking the same thing, except my setup would be a 54 tooth big ring and using an 11 spd 10-42 with like an xtr long cage RD.... since I just did St. George, I know that I'm ok with a 42/28 equivalent of 1.5 gear ratio up the steepest climbs... so that means I'd never have to use all the way to a 42, but I could have used a bigger gear than the 54/11 on the downhills, albeit brief, but pedaling at over 40 and up to 50 has some advantages, could have shaved another 1 minute or so off the time.... otherwise was forced to coast. It would be sweet if SRAM would make a 10-36 cassette, then I'd be doing it sooner.

It certainly would be course specific. I run a single ring from time to time. My KISS solution.


-SD

That's about as simple as it gets. Was there a single-speed category in your race?

No, not in this race, but it was pretty flat and wind was only ~10-15.
At my best I'm a mid-pack TT guy so riding my track bike gives me excuses beyond my lack of fitness and inability to suffer.

-SD

Dayum......nice position!!!

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

I ran CX this fall with "normal" 9-speed gearing and never left the 46-tooth chainring so it's not a stretch for CX. I also never left the 52-tooth chainring while living in the big Easy, but for other, not so flat courses, such a wide-ranging cassette would require larger jumps between gears, making it harder to find the sweet spot at times.

Am I the only one that runs the 53 on the front until I get to the 25 in the back, then I drop to the 39 until I get to the 13 in the front, then...

I don't think I ever shift the front looking for that perfect gear ratio, and I've never ridden with anyone that has mentioned doing it. If I see a hill coming up (or know one is around the corner) I will shift the front if needed in advance. Otherwise I just stay where I'm at.

---

"...the street finds its own uses for things"

Ok, decided to try a 1x10 set up on my training (road) bike as an experiment. A 1x11 set up would really be ideal, but right now I don't want (have $$!) to change everything to 11sp.

I currently use 53/39 chainrings, with an 11-25 cassette. Going to run a 53t chainring upfront with an 11-32t cassette. I already had a SRAM Rival Wi-Fi RD, so I just needed a new cassette...

The 53-32 low gear will give me a ratio pretty much the same as a 39-24 - I rarely use the 25t cog anyway in any of my training rides/races, so it shouldn't be much different. If I battle I can always change the chainring to a 52 which will give me the equivalent of a 39-25..

Will see how the gear gaps are and report back in a few weeks. If it works and I don't get any dropped chains I may use this on my race (Tri) bike as well.

Oh, and on further investigation, one can get hi-spec light 11-32 cassettes (just cost $$) so the weight loss moving to a 1x setup will be more substantial than I initially thought.

Correct - subsequently saw that too, thanks. I also forget to subtract the weight of losing the front chainring, so now looking at a weight reduction around 200 - 250g...