Why don't people use single chainrings?
Comments
-
I can see the advantages of the single chainring, such as the reduced complexity, but I can't really see it catching on on the road.
Although you can get a similar gear range using the wide cassettes as you could with compacts a few years ago, the spacing between the gears is going to be much bigger. I like small jumps between gears and having that extra chainring at the front is a small price to pay.
I also do wonder about the real benefits of only running one chainring on the road- even the chain retention thing, and can't help but think it's just a marketing gimmick at its heart.0 -
Because 2 is twice as good as 1.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I think, single chainring will become mainstream once manufacturers develop reliable wifi. We will have any range of gears integrated in a rear hub and brakes in both front and rear hubs. That fixed chain line will be lovely!0
-
A Swiss Army hub? Do I really need to explain why this is such a terrible idea?English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0
-
A Swiss Army hub? Do I really need to explain why this is such a terrible idea?
It'l be fine. I'll take the one with ABS.0 -
And a dyno.A Swiss Army hub? Do I really need to explain why this is such a terrible idea?
It'l be fine. I'll take the one with ABS.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Yes, that's what I was thinking. Either that or he is grinding up hills on 50/18 at a very low cadence where it would be much better to drop to 34/18 and spin up the hills, probably faster and less tiring than in 50/18.If 50/18 is perfect for the "hills" where you live, I would suggest that where you live has no hills. Or, if it really does, and you can scream up anything with 50/18 I would suggest you call Trek Factory Racing as allegedly they are looking for a GC contender.0 -
Yes, that's what I was thinking. Either that or he is grinding up hills on 50/18 at a very low cadence where it would be much better to drop to 34/18 and spin up the hills, probably faster and less tiring than in 50/18.If 50/18 is perfect for the "hills" where you live, I would suggest that where you live has no hills. Or, if it really does, and you can scream up anything with 50/18 I would suggest you call Trek Factory Racing as allegedly they are looking for a GC contender.
I thought the 'perfect gear, meant which gear is the best overall for all purposes. 50 x 18 is a gear I can get up local hills on and, yes, it is at a low cadence, but I use that to increase power for time trials. If I do hill intervals specifically for power I will use a 53x12. 50x18 is a comfortable gear that I enjoy riding and forces me to ride at a variety of cadences and powers where, if using gears I would opt for the best one for that section of road which would not have the same training benefit.0 -
I've got a 1x10 on my MTB and it's great. Spins out at 25mph but that is fine. I like it simple. There are a couple of ascents that I can't make which were ok on my old bike which was 27speed. The interesting thing is that I'm looking at weight loss and method as the answer to these rather than accepting I've got the wrong number of gears.
My road bike is a Compact though, and theres no way I could tackle the terrain around here (Devon) without a double ring. Top and bottom gears get used on every ride and even then, I could always do with a bigger or smaller cog!
Might be different if I lived somewere different though.0 -
In the old days, a five speed racer was a common thing (ie 1 x 5). Now such things largely don't exist and the only explanation is the success of marketing over what people actually need. Because, obviously, if there is a real world point in having a single speed bike and a real world point in having a 20 speed bike (and I think that there is) then it can make no sense that there isn't a place for something in between. IMO, there's a lot of people in flat places who are running either too few gears or far too many!Faster than a tent.......0
-
Come to Dorset with a single ringWhen i die I just hope the wife doesn't sell my stuff for what I told her I paid for it other wise someone will be getting a mega deal!!!
De rosa superking 888 di20 -
Come to Dorset with a single ring
Plenty of people ride fixed in Dorset and big distances as well.
Whatever you can think of, someone has done it fixed almost certainly.0 -
I've got a 46F, 11-32R setup on my commuter; it's fine for everything I use it for, including short steep hills and reasonably fast descents. I use a crossbike with a 46/36 front and an 11-28 for winter group rides, and find I don't really use the inner ring, so that could also go 1-by, I suppose (although I spin out on descents and in a fast chaingang). But anything much longer than Carbone or Essendon and I'd be begging for a lower gear. I had a 34x32 as my bottom gear last time I went to the Alps, and was glad of it; by the same token anything lower than a 50x11 would be too low for the descents. Hell, I spin out the 52/12 on my S5 going down Fitzjohns Avenue...
I think the real issue is the rear, not the front. 46 or 44F and 10-40R would work well, but you need a special freehub (SRAM XD) which is hard to find on road hubs. You would still have the big jumps in cadence, but the whole concept of narrow cadence ranges is quite new (and obviously alien to fixed/ss riders). Not sure, though, that the minor benefits of a single front ring would be worth the compromise. It's a sub-200g saving, and with modern electric gears you get no rub and no shifting problems (frankly this is also true with well set up mechanical).0 -
In the old days, a five speed racer was a common thing (ie 1 x 5). Now such things largely don't exist and the only explanation is the success of marketing over what people actually need. Because, obviously, if there is a real world point in having a single speed bike and a real world point in having a 20 speed bike (and I think that there is) then it can make no sense that there isn't a place for something in between. IMO, there's a lot of people in flat places who are running either too few gears or far too many!
I agree with this.
Whats needed is modern 1x5 or 2x5 groupset so you get the best of both.0 -
In the old days, a five speed racer was a common thing (ie 1 x 5). Now such things largely don't exist and the only explanation is the success of marketing over what people actually need. Because, obviously, if there is a real world point in having a single speed bike and a real world point in having a 20 speed bike (and I think that there is) then it can make no sense that there isn't a place for something in between. IMO, there's a lot of people in flat places who are running either too few gears or far too many!
I agree with this.
Whats needed is modern 1x5 or 2x5 groupset so you get the best of both.
Thats not agreeing.
Agreeing would be 1x11
What would be the point in modern 5 speed? Weight saving?
The only reason they had 5 speed was because it was the limit of technology at that time wasn't it?
Gearing is personal, just use what works best for you.
No point in blaming marketing for bigger cassettes/more chainrings.
If people are that stupid not to know what works best for them, then blame their stupidity!
Marketing is just a myth people who do not like modern things use to poo poo them.
5 speed was modern (and 'marketed') once :roll:
I don't feel 'marketed' by anything.
Its just there and I try it out, or want it because I think it would be good.
Sometimes it might not be good, but I bought it more because I wanted to than someone was telling me I should
iphones and apple watches are the type of things people are brainwashed to buy.0 -
I run 1 x 10 (32:11-36) on all my mountain bikes (except the SS!) and 1 x 10 (42:11-32) on my road bike and have done for a few years. I have no problem keeping up with the pack or getting up steep climbs. I use a bash plate to stop the chain coming off the outside and it never seems to come off the inside. The new thick-thin chainring systems and clutch rear mechs will be the way to go though for single ring setups.
I got fed up with either the front derailleaur rubbing or having to trim it so ditched it years ago. The next bike I get will have SRAM Force 1 on as that seems to be a great system.0 -
What would be the point in modern 5 speed? Weight saving?
No not that bothered about weight.
With 5 speed with 130mm hub spacing you could have more chunky & durable cassete, chain rings & chain,it could be marketed as a training/utility-commuter bike groupset.
Also would be good for CX.
Probably they won't make it as you wouldn't sell as many spares because the parts would last 1000's of miles.
No doubt they will bring out new 12 speed groupsets with parts so thin they wear out after 500 miles & cost double that of 10/11 speed to replace the parts.
Also why is cx1 groupset so expensive, were is the sora lvl version?
http://www.roadbikereview.com/reviews/do-we-really-need-11-speed0 -
11spd durability is every bit as good as 10spd and prices are actually cheaper (for Shimano at least). The only advantages of a modern 5spd (if they brought out such a thing) would be cleaner chainline and lighter weight which your changes remove.English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0
-
I don't feel 'marketed' by anything.
Which is testament to how effective the marketing is.
Competition-style equipment is what the manufacturers want to sell us, which is fine for a lot of cyclists (particularly that post on forums like this), but does not reflect the diversity of road cyclists more generally - not that this matters much, because they make huge amounts of money from people that buy bikes that aren't suitable for their needs, and would prefer to sell you more things than fewer, so less durable is better.
There are plenty of cyclists that ride road bikes but don't need the full spread of a modern cassette or the high and low gears, and could benefit from having fewer cogs. 5-8 speed transmissions are very durable. I can't see it happening, though. Likewise diversity of gearing ranges within the current ranges - modern 13/14 up cassettes would suit a lot of riders that don't need big gears.0 -
I am thinking about it.
Garbaruk make a 50 narrow wide ring. Spinning out won't be a problem with that. I would just have to gut the left hand shifter.
For my commuter bike a 44T or 46 would be big enough but parts need to wear out first. For my TT bike it is viable and I will probably make the modification.http://www.thecycleclinic.co.uk -wheel building and other stuff.0 -
Better run bigger than a 50t on the TT rig if you want a half decent chainline.English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0
-
I love these threads because they show just how different we all are and how many different things we want from our equipment - everything from fixed SS to Triples. That's why it makes me smile (too) when people blame marketing for things like "gravel bikes". All that these companies are doing is filling niches in a saturated market. We are incredibly lucky that we can pretty much buy anything and everything to the point that we're now complaining that we can't buy 5-speed (which sits between 3-speed and 8-speed hub gears). Whilst we can make do we really don't have to. If all of this is a marketeer's wet dream, it's certainly the supply chain manager's nightmare of complexity and it will all certainly stretch the marketing budget. I, for one, am happy to be able to go on-line and buy pretty much anything I can dream of for my cycling habit. I'm currently living my gravel/adventure bike - it's doing all the things that I was wasting my MTB on that a CX doesn't do well enough to justify.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0
-
Hi,
Can I just say thanks for everyone's responses, I wanted to post this on here to see the range of reactions, clearly some are very against it but I'm glad to see some potential.
It's not a marketing trick, I just want to see how consumers will react, clearly its split opinions, just like electronic group-sets.
I have the manufacturing means and the engineering skills to manufacture a single chainring that would be priced competitively, essentially because there is no entry level single chainring conversion set.
If anyone is interested in the product, or wants to know more, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Thanks,
J0 -
. For my TT bike it is viable and I will probably make the modification.
35 Years ago I took off the inner chainring for time trials, could have done it for criteria too because we never used anything but 52x 13/14/15/16.
No point for single chainrings on any other bikes though because i don't want too may gaps in the rear.
6 Years ago I stepped into cycling again after a break of 20 years with a 9 speed bike and still see no point in any more cogs now, so als long as I can buy 9 speed cogs I will stay 9 speed.0 -
I will use a 50T ring on the tt bike. However my winter training bike hasa shifter problem. The right hand athena shifter is giving me jip so I will be gutting it and turning them into brake levers then fit a down tube shifter and a 44T single ring and have simplicity once again . This bike did have down tube shifter 18 months ago but I thought I would upgrade that went well.http://www.thecycleclinic.co.uk -wheel building and other stuff.0
