MTB 2x10 drivetrain

[neil_bolton]

Mr E said:

Very, very rarely, and by that point it's usually time for a rest.

I could lose the big ring and not be bothered except for the very odd downhill road section. And even then, I suspect more leg speed would sort that out.


Edit: And I should also point out that mine is a 3x8 setup. That I ripped the rear mech off last saturday...

If you'd had a 7spd chain, that would never have happened.

[OneDs]

neil_bolton said:

True, but what happens when you open that internal device after 3 years when it's finally ground to a halt and you realise its a nightmare inside, full of twigs, squirrels and water, and that the bike shops don't carry spares because the next new type of device has come along (Gripshift, iDrive, etc anyone)?

Makes the chain and deraillier seems quite trusty.

Well you might buy a new gearbox, which has cost you hopefully in the same region as the groupset you would have had to replace on the derailer bike you treated the same way to ruin all the components.

Because hopefully the system won't be a fly by night it will be a SRAM/Shimano/Campag product with the back-up and support you currently get from them for the current products long after they've gone the way of the dodo because. Yep, that's right the derailer world never changes does it? We are talking about 10 & 11 speeds today only a few years ago the max on any bike was 9, before that it was 8. With significant changes in componentry that meant 8 speeds cannot be converted to 9 and 10. In the mean time SRAM & shimano might cross over on most but not campag, even that is becoming less and less of an opportunity for competition.

I'm just saying it would be nice to have the opportunity to try a viable alternative.

[OneDs]

neil_bolton said:

ps what does this mean? "and not loaded on the rear wheel for off road biking" - I'm genuinedly intriuged...

With a multi-geared hub on the rear wheel, more of the bikes weight distribution is located on the rear triangle, so the bike is compromised, also as it weighs more the rear triangle with or without sus has to do more work. On a BB gearbox the weight would be on the BB and therefore the strength/weight of the triangle would be less of an issue.

[neil_bolton]

OneDs said:

Well you might buy a new gearbox, which has cost you hopefully in the same region as the groupset you would have had to replace on the derailer bike you treated the same way to ruin all the components.

Because hopefully the system won't be a fly by night it will be a SRAM/Shimano/Campag product with the back-up and support you currently get from them for the current products long after they've gone the way of the dodo because. Yep, that's right the derailer world never changes does it? We are talking about 10 & 11 speeds today only a few years ago the max on any bike was 9, before that it was 8. With significant changes in componentry that meant 8 speeds cannot be converted to 9 and 10. In the mean time SRAM & shimano might cross over on most but not campag, even that is becoming less and less of an opportunity for competition.

I'm just saying it would be nice to have the opportunity to try a viable alternative.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have alternatives, and if there was one that was as reliable, easily produced without patent and was maintainable by the hobbyist, then I think it would take off.

However I can't see Mr and Mrs Higgins paying garage labour rates for the maintenance or replacment of their bicycle which was supposed to be a cheaper alternative to the car/bus/train etc.

And that is the crux of the issue - until the market makes the technology cheap enough then it wont take off - but I cant see disposable systems being ethically well recieved - there are more than enough bikes out there still running well enough with basic parts replaced.

It's a huge road to go down - and I can't see the bike industry getting behind it outside of the more specialised models - take the belt drive for example - a wonderful idea...

[neil_bolton]

OneDs said:

With a multi-geared hub on the rear wheel, more of the bikes weight distribution is located on the rear triangle, so the bike is compromised, also as it weighs more the rear triangle with or without sus has to do more work. On a BB gearbox the weight would be on the BB and therefore the strength/weight of the triangle would be less of an issue.

Maybe.

But don't forget that much of an off-road bikes grip is made up from the weight over the rear wheel, never mind the fact that moving the weight forward brings in all sorts of issues with handling up front.

But I get your point, and it's a valid one

[BOR]

neil_bolton said:

I wonder how many people actually know how to get rid of stiff links without resorting to a chain device,

Go on then,I'm all agog.

[shalmaneser]

BOR said:

Go on then,I'm all agog.

I'll assume he means chain tool, not chain device as a chain device wouldn't be much use in that situation.

simply bend the chain back and forth across the stiff link the 'wrong way' (ie. put your thumbs on one side of the chain and your fingers on the other side) and give it a gentle flex. It'll only move a few degrees but will loosen a stiff link nicely.

Personally I'll be sticking with 2x9 gearing for a bit either until I get a bike spec'd with 2x10 or my X9 stuff wears out.

[Pablo16v]

neil_bolton said:

OneDs said:

With a multi-geared hub on the rear wheel, more of the bikes weight distribution is located on the rear triangle, so the bike is compromised, also as it weighs more the rear triangle with or without sus has to do more work. On a BB gearbox the weight would be on the BB and therefore the strength/weight of the triangle would be less of an issue.

Maybe.

But don't forget that much of an off-road bikes grip is made up from the weight over the rear wheel, never mind the fact that moving the weight forward brings in all sorts of issues with handling up front.

But I get your point, and it's a valid one

A friend of mine fitted a Rohloff to his Kona Stinky and had nothing but problems, most of which were attributed to the extra weight in the wheel. He regularly punctured dual ply Maxxis High Rollers, he bent god knows how many Mavic 823 rims and snapped quite a few spokes. He also found it harder bunny hopping stuff as the rear of the bike dropped soon after he'd lifted it off the ground. After persevering with it for about 18 months it now sits on a shelf in his garage. It could be though that it's just the wrong product for the wrong type of rider as he's very hard on his bikes and our trails up here are extremely demanding.

Having said all that another mate spent nearly 6 years riding a Nicolai Nucleon with frame mounted Rohloff and it was one of the sweetest bikes I've ever ridden. Of course, a decent suspension set up helped but it felt so planted on DH tracks and having the weight centred in the frame made it feel very neutral and stable in the air.

Having ridden both bikes quite a few times to get a feel for the Rohloff, as I was thinking of getting one myself, I'm of the opinion that for the type of riding I do it would be best buying one frame mounted, not in the back wheel, unless I was building a touring bike.

[neil_bolton]

shalmaneser said:

I'll assume he means chain tool, not chain device as a chain device wouldn't be much use in that situation.

simply bend the chain back and forth across the stiff link the 'wrong way' (ie. put your thumbs on one side of the chain and your fingers on the other side) and give it a gentle flex. It'll only move a few degrees but will loosen a stiff link nicely.

Personally I'll be sticking with 2x9 gearing for a bit either until I get a bike spec'd with 2x10 or my X9 stuff wears out.

The man gets a gold star.

Edited to add: If I were not doing more DHey stuff along the way, the odd uplift day, the Megavalanche, that sort of thing, I probably wouldn't be looking at 1 x 10 so seriously - after all, there's been nothing wrong with my middle/big ring setup for years.

However, in my case, I know I need the reliablity of a chain device, smaller chainring up front front etc. Therefore it makes a lot of sense to go to 10 speed over 9 speed whereupon I see a better range of gears.

Having now ridden it, and talking to mates who ride singlespeed, there is more than enough merit in the idea of a simple setup and we believe that the 1 x 10 setup with maybe a 32t up front and a 11-36 rear would suit pretty much 95% of all the riders in the UK.

That it is utterly reliable and works so well, leaving less to worry about up front (for example, I now change gear more knowing I have a gear 'there' to use just before a climb rather than tempt fate with a front chainring drop) to enjoy the riding.

Not once, in all the time I've ridden amongst well connected and informed UK riders (and abroad) have I heard anyone say that its NOT a good upgrade.

Edited by neil_bolton on Tuesday 22 March 08:50

[Mr E]

neil_bolton said:

If you'd had a 7spd chain, that would never have happened.

Well, my old (cerca '95) Marin cross country bike had a 7 speed STX-RC and I didn't rip the mech off that.

So you're right...

[a11y_m]

IMO triple-ring setups have had their day for MTBing: too much gear overlap. I've been running 2x9 on both my geared MTBs for a couple of years now and don't regret a thing. More than enough gears for everything apart from blasting downhill on fireroad, but where's the fun in that anyway? 36t chainring with 11t cog is enough for most stuff - I'd prefer a 38t though 'cos I is a machine

When 8-sp was the normal, the arrival of 9-sp brought the same concerns about chain strength, etc that I've heard about 10-sp. I think it's fair to say that's been disproved. 10-speed will also be MORE reliable than 9-speed as it works on a completely different cable-pull ratio, i.e. it pulls more cable per shift. This means dirty cables will have less of an effect on shift performance, meaning less mis-shifts, i.e. less chance of mashing the chain.

I'm happy staying with 2x9 but will naturally change to 2x10 as things wear out, etc.

[neil_bolton]

a11y_m said:

IMO triple-ring setups have had their day for MTBing: too much gear overlap. I've been running 2x9 on both my geared MTBs for a couple of years now and don't regret a thing. More than enough gears for everything apart from blasting downhill on fireroad, but where's the fun in that anyway? 36t chainring with 11t cog is enough for most stuff - I'd prefer a 38t though 'cos I is a machine

When 8-sp was the normal, the arrival of 9-sp brought the same concerns about chain strength, etc that I've heard about 10-sp. I think it's fair to say that's been disproved. 10-speed will also be MORE reliable than 9-speed as it works on a completely different cable-pull ratio, i.e. it pulls more cable per shift. This means dirty cables will have less of an effect on shift performance, meaning less mis-shifts, i.e. less chance of mashing the chain.

I'm happy staying with 2x9 but will naturally change to 2x10 as things wear out, etc.

Talking to a mate today about this subject (he's a Canadian bike shop spanner monkey - local whistler shop) and he's agreed with mine and your points. He also pointed out that the pin sizes of the chain are smaller and therefore there is more flexibility and strength proportionally on the chain.

He also mentioned that Shimano spent considerable time showing the mechanics the ins and outs of the new technology (including the cable throw etc) as Shimano are only too aware of the naysayers, and obviously wouldn't roll out something that could negatively impact their reputation. As it is, over in Canada it's apparently the done thing to run 1 x 10 spd with all the North Shore and Whistler riding that is done.

he also just kicked my arse around Ashton Court today, but thats another thing. He did say, however, that Ashton Court is an incredible trail

[village idiot]

i'm just completing my 1x9sp conversion...

looking at various parts of the bike

you ideally need to buy a singlespeed chainring which will work with a 9-speed chain. budget on approx £30 for this (i am going to use a 34t item). this will mount on the crankset in place of the middle ring. you can use a normal chainring, but these have shifting gates and ramps which can cause problems. if you have a 5-bolt crankset (relatively unusual), this will limit your options further

if you are going to run a chain device (i am running a superstar xcr upper device - approx £16, but you could spend 10x more), you need to look at what sort of bottom bracket you are using. my bike uses a octalink splined sealed cartridge jobby and in order to preserve the chainline (ie. chainring in line with 5th (middle) sprocket), i needed to buy a e-type bottom bracket (as rare as hens teeth now, and £35 minimum wih the few places that have them in stock).

as there will be space for an outer ring, you could fit a bashguard (which fits as per a big ring) to protect you shiny new single speed rig or if you are really , simply grind down the teeth on an old outer ring and use that as a bashguard (just as effective).

if you have an existing good cassette then fine, but my bike was singlespeed before, so i invested in a shiny new SRAM 11-34 cassette with a matching 9-speed chain. This was about £35 all in.

next up was the gear shifting system. i bought a second-hand Deore XT rapidfire shifter (£12), new cable set (£10) and a older XTR medium cage rear mech (£20) which i have stripped and renovated with new xcnc 11t jockey wheels (£25).

if you are currently running a fully geared setup, then you are looking at the chainring, chain device (although you could live without this provided you use a short cage rear mech) and a short or medium cage rear mech (you will almost certainly have a long-cage mech to begin with).

in terms of weight savings, there isn't a massive amount in it to be honest... you are saving the weight of one shifter, one front mech and one chainring (about 600g all in), but you may be putting about 75g back in with the chain device (or more, if you go for an upper and lower jobbie).

however, if you combine those savings with a pair of rocket ron evolution tyres (
£40 from on one on special offer at the mo), you could save nicely over 1kg (2.2lbs) on a 'regular bike' with 27-30 gears and normal tyres.... less than £100 all in could save all that weight!

i can't wait to get cracking... it will be different from the norm and should be more reliable to boot.

[donfisher]

Can I put a request in for an update when you try it out?

I've just been looking at mine and realised that I can swap the outer ring into the middle and like you say, put a guard on the outside and do away with the derailleur, shifter and two rings.