Single speed up front?

evo3ben

At the moment i have a double ring set up 22/32/bash but am weighing up the pros and cons of going to a single ring up front (32) and ditching the front deraileur and shifter. I only use the Granny on long hill climbs but im sure i will cope with doing them with just the 32. Any one done this or have any thoughts?

ddraver

My mate runs a rigid with a 1x9 set up and is a big fan - It will certainly make you fitter!

You do need a chain guide though..

ride_whenever

It's fine, if you get a ss specific chainring with no shifting gates then you don't need a chainguide if your chainline is good, that said i do drop my chain occasionally, but only when moving the bike around, not when riding.

lee96

i changed to single up front and my chain jumped off as soon as i hit anything that shook the bike, might have just been the chain being too slack, i got a Blackspire Guide fitted and it works a treat and definately keeps you fitter

Northwind

Superstar do a nice cheap single ring guide, or you can just use an old mech (that's what's on my commuter, looks rotten but it works)

I'm not sure myself how good an idea it is, I had to do most of Penmachno with only the 36T middle ring after the granny ring fell off ( :oops: ) and it was bloody miserable frankly. Though with a 32T and a better setup it'd have been less of an issue- it kept shifting down into the missing granny ring if I used the 34T cog on the rear so I had to avoid even that. So, building my rigid up with 32T on the front and a 34T cassette on the back, we'll see how that goes

nickfrog

I have switched to 1x9 a year ago and never looked back. I am a bit of a spinner and not young anymore so I went for 29t single ring which works perfectly for my riding.

No chain device and I haven't dropped the chain once despite very technical/rocky trails as I have a short cage, great spring tension in the rear mech and specific ring with loger teeth and no ramps, which helps massively.

It has really transformed my riding. I love the simplicity (a bit like of a child'st bike), no chain rub and easier to clean. Weight gain was around 350g.

10-speed make things even better I guess.

See my bike in sig. for photos.

bennett_346

Why would you want to do that :?

Northwind

bennett_346 wrote:

Why would you want to do that :?

Light weight and simplicity. Also helps focus the mind a bit, ie, if you're riding up a hill and you have lower gears available you may use them even if you don't need to. Take them off and you can't give in to weakness

bennett_346

Northwind wrote:

bennett_346 wrote:

Why would you want to do that :?

Light weight and simplicity. Also helps focus the mind a bit, ie, if you're riding up a hill and you have lower gears available you may use them even if you don't need to. Take them off and you can't give in to weakness

Hehe, i think i'll stick with the lazy route

evo3ben

Luckily i have 2 cranks, Raceface evolve and an SLX so what i think i will do is use the SLX as a triple for when i do the odd marathon and use the raceface crank as a single. This would mean changing the crank over and setting up the front mech & shifter each time i do a marathon which is only 2-3 times a year so wont be too bad.

Thanks for the heads up on the Superstars single chain guide, this will def be purchased to help the chain stay in place. Just to confirm, will this chain guide fit my middle ring if left in its original position on my crank?

Im looking forward to giving this a try! weight loss, less shifting, less cluttered bar, easier to clean, less chain noise and get fitter! sounds ideal 8)

nickfrog

bennett_346 wrote:

Why would you want to do that :?

Why would you need 3 rings if you can replicate the gears you actually need with one ?

It might not be for everyone nor for every terrain but there is a strong resistance to change due to the tradition of 3 rings.

bennett_346

nickfrog wrote:

bennett_346 wrote:

Why would you want to do that :?

Why would you need 3 rings if you can replicate the gears you actually need with one ?

It might not be for everyone nor for every terrain but there is a strong resistance to change due to the tradition of 3 rings.

I have 2, and regularly use the full range available. I guess i just ride more difficult terrain than some.

Northwind

bennett_346 wrote:

I have 2, and regularly use the full range available. I guess i just ride more difficult terrain than some.

I guess you're most likely wrong. Remember the little ring only gives you a handful of lower gears, a strong rider can compensate (and wouldn't generally bother using the crawler gears regardless) Watching singlespeeders at play showed me this but 1x9 is much more flexible.

bennett_346

Northwind wrote:

bennett_346 wrote:

I have 2, and regularly use the full range available. I guess i just ride more difficult terrain than some.

I guess you're most likely wrong. Remember the little ring only gives you a handful of lower gears, a strong rider can compensate (and wouldn't generally bother using the crawler gears regardless) Watching singlespeeders at play showed me this but 1x9 is much more flexible.

Nah i find that on really steep trails with loose slippy ground that a big gear gives me too much torque and the front lifts up, or if im standing up to do them the rear loses traction. Just think of trying to drive a car off road, if the ground is slippy you dont put the pedal to the metal, or you'll wheelspin.

Similarly i use my biggest gear for the long road section home.

My local riding is so varied that a double and bash is the most suitable way of doing it.

Northwind

Yeah, but we're not talking about big gears here, the lowest gear on 34 rear 32 front is about the same as the 4th bottom gear in the 22T, the rest is all just overlap. So it's like going to double from triple, you don't lose as much as you expect.

I'm not a total convert or anything, it's only on my rigid XC bike but don't assume it's not practical. I like the 22T just for mincing along at walking pace on really long days and for recovery on long climbs- a fitness compensator- but I've never felt I need it even on the steepest or scrabbliest pitches.

nickfrog

It also depends on the bike. I've noticed how anything other than the granny seem to induce a lot of bobbing on FS bikes.

Northwind

Now that depends on the bike. Fives for instance are supposedly optimised for middle ring pedalling. Anthems feel about the same regardless of gear.

bennett_346

Can't tell any difference in bob on the chainrings on my bike.

Im only asking, i sort of agree that if you want to save 3 grams you might ditch the granny ring, but i cant see any real reason to lose out on gears for.

Northwind

bennett_346 wrote:

Im only asking, i sort of agree that if you want to save 3 grams you might ditch the granny ring, but i cant see any real reason to lose out on gears for.

Mainly it's the same reason singlespeeders singlespeed. ie they are weirdos

Weight saving's a fair amount though when you think about it- granny ring, 4 bolts, front mech, cable and outers, and shifter. Even adding a chain device it's a decent chunk. It's also cheaper o'course.

Only reason I wouldn't do it on a real bike myself is that I'd need to do a 32T middle ring, I wouldn't miss the little ring often in the UK but I'd miss the highest gears I think compared to 36T.

milfredo

I'm so tempted myself... I can only think of one tiny hill at Swinly that I use the Granny ring on and even that I normally push the last bit. The simplicity of 1X9 just seems great and for 99% of the riding, it would do me fine...

I'm being a whimp though and going 2X9 to start and just test myself not to drop to the lowest. If I suceed, I will change, change is good for skills!