Thinking of going single up front ?

s1mon

Hi,

Currently running a XT 175mm double (38/26) with a 10 speed cassette 36-11 on my Cotic Soul. I'd like or I think I'd be better off with a single up front, today on some trails I mostly stayed in the small ring up front but I think the 26 is too small.

Any suggestions what size chainring I should go for ? I'm going to be changing the cranks anyway so looking for a new chainset anyway just not sure what make and size ring to go for ?

Also will I need some sort of chain device ?

Thanks.

supersonic

Do you use the 26-36 combo much?

s1mon

I did today but feel like I be better with something with few more teeth :?

YeehaaMcgee

s1mon wrote:

Hi,

Currently running a XT 175mm double (38/26) with a 10 speed cassette 36-11 on my Cotic Soul. I'd like or I think I'd be better off with a single up front, today on some trails I mostly stayed in the small ring up front but I think the 26 is too small.

I'd suggest that if you're staying in the granny ring most of the time, then maybe you're not the usual kind of rider who suits a single ring setup. You'll run out of sensible pedalling speed quite early with (for example) a 30-32 tooth chainring.

I'd recommend that you build up your leg strength until you find yourself riding everywhere in the 38T before considering dropping a gear.

YeehaaMcgee

s1mon wrote:

I did today but feel like I be better with something with few more teeth :?

Again - prime candidate for not switching to a single ring up front.

supersonic

I agree, cannot see any benefits here, i think it will hinder you.

paul.skibum

Well, the 38t is too big a ring for a single and the 26 is probably too small - a 30 or 32 might work for him but then again it might not. Certainly a 26t single rign set up would be a bit noddy.

YeehaaMcgee

But he does actually use the lowest gear - so it would be counter productive to remove it.

70\ʹspenguin

With your current set up if you swapped to a 34t ring up front you would lose the bottom two gears from the 26 ring - meaning the two largest sprockets on the back. Unless you spend all your time in the 26 and the two largest sprokets this would perhaps be the most favourable to change to. You would still keep your middle ratios that you had in the small ring but gain a few larger for DH's and road use perhaps.

YeehaaMcgee

But he'd lose the high gears, for descending and road use.

The Rookie

You need to keep track of what gears you do and don't use, as 70sP says, if you never use the lowest two gears at the back on the 26T front you can 'get away' with a 32T single.

Most people I know who ride 1x use a 32 or 34T (more usually a 32T on a 29er).

Chunkers1980

I'd fit a triple, then you'll have all gears you need. Weird concept I know.

felix.london

Always makes me chuckle these ones. I mean how is anyone else to know?

Everyone is just guessing...only you can answer these questions.

I changed the 38t that came as standard on my DH bike to a 34t because with the 12-27 cassette even a small uphill section in the trail would have me out of the saddle and having to push hard on the cranks

I also changed from a 38t to a 34t on my fun bike because I've gotta pretty nasty hill from town to get back home and a 34/34 lowest gear is really the minimum -for me- to do this comfortably - especially after a couple of beers

Just do some experimenting with what you've got and take it from there. Just note any changes resulting in less gears will make your bike less versatile should you wanna take it to the Alps for example - or N. Wales or Scotland or Spain or anywhere with some proper mountains..you'll def miss those low and high gears then

lawman

If you spend most of a ride in the granny ring, a single ring is utterly, utterly stupid, it would have no benefit at all and just be plain daft. Keep the double and change the biggest cog for a 36 or 34.

njee20

I'd suggest that if you're staying in the granny ring most of the time, then maybe you're not the usual kind of rider who suits a single ring setup.

+1

Always makes me chuckle these ones. I mean how is anyone else to know?

Whilst I agree, he's told us he did virtually a whole ride in the 26t, including using his absolute bottom gear. That is enough information to know that it will be a compromise going 1x10, which was the question.

Anonymous

Single involves a bit of compromise but it could be you're dropping to the granny on the double often because the big ring is big.

At 38t, when in 36t at the back it's still not low enough so you drop to the granny and maybe sit in it for a bit as the granny on a 2x10 at 26t gives you a fair bit of range.

*But*, swap that 26-38 for a 34t at the front and you may find the 36t at the back is then low enough to get you up most climbs and you wont need the granny. Though will require a little more effort at first, but soon get used to it. The range will be fine generally unless you like a lot of top end high speed.

That's exactly why I dropped to a single on my C456 and I'm very tempted to change my 39/26 on the Nomad to a 34t single.

Other factor is whether the 2x is bothering you anyway. If it works and shifting is smooth and you're not getting chain drop & clatter issues, then stick with the 2x. If like I find a front mech is annoying and loose chain on the granny plus chain drops (even with a guide) is annoying, then 1x10 time and bin the annoying front mech (really something that needs a redesign).

YeehaaMcgee

He's said that he was in the very lowest gear, deadkenny. Granny ring and large sprocket.

Anonymous

Yep, 26t front, 36t back.

But that could easily be out of habit. 34t front is not that much different to 26t when using the big sprocket / 36t at the back, and that gives you a single ring. With his double at 38t front the lowest gear is going to have you dropping to the granny as 38t is too big.

YeehaaMcgee

deadkenny wrote:

Yep, 26t front, 36t back.

But that could easily be out of habit. 34t front is not that much different to 26t when using the big sprocket / 36t at the back, and that gives you a single ring.

But it IS different. If he's currently relying on those gears, then it's a bloody stupid idea to get rid of them.
There is NO advantage here to going single ring.

njee20

^^^ this

Different mentalities I guess. I went single ring because I never used gears that it didn't cover. It sounds like DK did it for other reasons, thinking he'd get stronger to acclimatise to the more limited ratios.

YeehaaMcgee

Maybe he was overcompensating, or believed it would make him more sexually virile.

felix.london

I think the OP wasn't really thinking it through tbh and was suggesting some kind on 26 or 28t single ring set up :?

Anyway : 22/36 double + 11-32 XT cassette = Medium Cage XT mech...she goes up, she goes down, she hits less things...happy days

70\ʹspenguin

Op states when in 26-36 it felt like he needed more teeth, so i assume this means it was too spinny? This could call for a larger front sprocket but could also call for a better use of the existing gears parhaps? (not trying to be patronising)

If the OP "needs" the 36rear to get up hills then there is quite a large difference in going to a 34 upfront. He would lose the lowest 3 gears and effectively be in the 4th sprocket to get the same level of "spin". When your legs are knackered 3 sprocket sizes can feel enormous.

I think the op needs to carefully look at what gears he is using regularly and then decide. It may pay dividends to go to a 34 (the lowest i would recommend without losing too much top end), to increase stamina and strength, but5 not at the loss of enjoyment on the trails which is only going to be counter-productive.

Chunkers1980

No the op said he used his Granny all time, he need more teeth in that

70\ʹspenguin

Chunkers1980 wrote:

No the op said he used his Granny all time, he need more teeth in that

I read it as he wants more teeth on the granny and hence a larger ring? <

---

that sentence is wrong on sooooo many levels!

YeehaaMcgee

s1mon wrote:

Currently running a XT 175mm double (38/26) with a 10 speed cassette 36-11...
on some trails I mostly stayed in the small ring up front

supersonic wrote:

Do you use the 26-36 combo much?

s1mon wrote:

I did today but feel like I be better with something with few more teeth :?

^^If you're relying on the granny ring for whatever reason, then no, a single ring is not advised.

Too many frigging sheep here "yeah, the latest thing is a single ring, yeah, and an Audi. You should emulate us, because we read it in MBR" etc.
For most riders, in most terrain, a single ring on an MTB doesn't make sense. Even elite XC racers (who don't exactly struggle up climbs) who use a single ring will still change the ratio depending on what course they're racing. So why limit your bike's capabilities.

Anonymous

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

There is NO advantage here to going single ring.

njee20 wrote:

It sounds like DK did it for other reasons, thinking he'd get stronger to acclimatise to the more limited ratios.

It's not that more limited and you do indeed acclimatise as there's not much in it when we're talking about a 26t "granny".

In his 26t, the 36t at the back is giving him a 1.4 ratio

At 34t with the same at the back it's 1.8.

A fraction more effort, nothing more, but he's then got one ring, no front mech, no front shifter and cabling, less mechanical failures and frustrations with front shifting, less maintenance, with a proper single ring less likely to drop the chain, less weight on the bike, no slack chain in the granny etc. No to mention potential slightly fitness gain from the marginal extra effort.

Generally all reasons why someone would want to go 1x in the first place. If the OP sees no benefit in any of this then fair enough, question has been answered and it would be pointless to go single up front.

If on the other hand he had a low granny, like 22t as you'd find on many factory fit 3x9 and he's in the granny and bottom gear all the way and struggling, absolutely it would be no benefit. My point is, and what I've found myself is 2x10 has a typical range that is not far off 1x10 and it's worth the small sacrifice in my opinion.

Not saying that "single is the way to go, yeah!", but that he may think he's relying on the granny but that's because he's got a big ring that's forcing him into the granny.

And no, didn't read it in MBR (never read it). Got fed up with front mech hassles, tried it and realised it was well worth it. Give it a go is all I say

Anonymous

To be fair though, if he meant is it worth binning the big ring and going single granny, i.e. 26t then I can understand the point of view. Pointless to do. Just keep what you've got.

YeehaaMcgee

I've said it before (particularly in reference to singlespeeds), and I'll say it again. If you think that limiting your choice of gears causes you to gain fitness, you're delusional - with a wide range of gears, you always have the choice of a harder gear anyway, but also a bail out option for when you just cannot turn the cranks. It's about as bullsh*t a reason for something as there could possibly be.
1:4 and 1:8 are substantially different gears, and for someone struggling in a low gear, losing a hundred grams or so of the bike will make absolutely zero change. they're not looking to gain nanoseconds on a race lap.

felix.london

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Too many frigging sheep here "yeah, the latest thing is a single ring, yeah, and an Audi. You should emulate us, because we read it in MBR" etc.
For most riders, in most terrain, a single ring on an MTB doesn't make sense. Even elite XC racers (who don't exactly struggle up climbs) who use a single ring will still change the ratio depending on what course they're racing. So why limit your bike's capabilities.

Very much this ^^

felix.london wrote:

Just note any changes resulting in less gears will make your bike less versatile should you wanna take it to the Alps for example - or N. Wales or Scotland or Spain or anywhere with some proper mountains

I don't see why you'd want to cobble your bike so you can only ride it comfortably on your local trails...to me mountain biking is all about adventure and I'm sorry but a single ring set-up is about as useful as a chocolate teapot if you actually wanna ride in some mountains at some stage

Anonymous

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

I've said it before (particularly in reference to singlespeeds), and I'll say it again. If you think that limiting your choice of gears causes you to gain fitness, you're delusional

Try it.

But it's in no way the reason why I did it though. I've stated my reasons and why I think they are any good reason to go 1x

and for someone struggling in a low gear, losing a hundred grams or so of the bike will make absolutely zero change

Absolutely, but again, not the main reason reason why I did it.

Anyway, as I say, I've got 1x10 on one bike, 2x10 on the other. I swap between the two often and have been very surprised that I can ride the 1x10 in places I'd normally be relying on the granny with the 2x10 and with ease. I've also had far less reliance on the 2x10 granny over time due to fitness mainly from riding the 1x10 and getting used to those gear ratios. Or maybe I'm delusional. Either way, every time I ride the 1x10 I keep thinking I love it, I enjoy the ride, it's comfortable and easy, and each time I ride the 2x10 I love the bike but keep thinking the front mech is a pain in the arse and actually I could easily ride 1x10 with no hassle on it.

Each to their own though as they say. Anyway, seems the OP's point is very different and really he would be better off with a 3x9/10 with a very low granny.