dr_lha

SRAM has a reputation for it, regardless of whether it's deserved!

CliffordK

The new Tanpan adapter (and perhaps the older Jtek adapters) allow the use of MTB derailleurs with road shifters.

Tanpan ? wolftoothcomponents.com
Tanpan ? Lindarets

T Stew

I love my 1x10 on the road. I find front derailleurs a PITA and the gear overlaps and shifting pattern maddening to my sense of order. I like it simple, all gears in one order shifting up or down with one lever. Plus it was a lot less grief to setup and less parts to buy, assuming you're piecing it together and don't already have a full groupset. Hills will change that equation obviously. It's pretty flat around here. I rarely even use my smallest and largest cog even after the conversion, and my gear spacing is tighter than it was with my 2x6 that was on prior. I'm debating going 1x with most all my future upgrades for road bikes.

Cage length has nothing to do with max cog size. And if you really wanted you can use a road RD with a dropped hanger. I am using a short-cage DuraAce 7800 rear derailleur with an 11-36 currently.

Bike Gremlin

It has to do with RD chain wrap capacity, but most short cage RDs won't go over a 36+ teeth - unless with an adapter like you used.

A previous poster posted a link to gear shift adapter that enables the use of Shimano MTB RDs with Shimano STIs.

So, it can be made to work. I would rather have a FD, than fiddle with all those adapters, but that's me.

Also, with a double, or a triple, you'd get a tighter cassette, with smaller gaps between adjacent gears, as well as wider total gearing (if you need that). Also, you wouldn't need to ride an 11 tooth cassette for greater top speed. 50-13 is much more efficient than 42-11 - chain wraps at a less steep angle and there's more teeth engaged. Sprockets and chainrings last longer.

corrado33

So basically your list of Pros boils down to

Less moving parts.
Less weight.

where as the list of cons grows to:

Larger gaps.
More expensive
Faster wear
Less range.

Stop kidding yourself. 1x setups are no better than front derailleur setups, they're simply lighter. They're worse in almost every other way compared to a properly adjusted bike.

On a road bike many of the above problems go away (then again, I'm not sure how you're dropping chains on a road setup anyway...), but you still have the "larger gaps between gears." If you've ridden for any amount of time on modern setups vs. old setups, you appreciate the more closely spaced gears, especially if you ride for long periods of time on flat ground, going the same speed. You want the PERFECT gear. Not one that's only close.

Jarrett2

I guess if I agreed with you it would

Yet another tech for BF to argue aimlessly about, hehe.

squirtdad

This simple way for the OP to check this out is to get a new bike with this setup (OP will understand the humor in the post I am 99.99% sure)

Jarrett2

That's a good idea!

Andy_K 

I've got a 1x10 setup with a 40T chainring and an 11-36 cassette on one of my bikes. It works pretty well for me as a commuter. Its low gear is almost as low as 34x32...close enough for me. Its high gear is closer to 50x14 than 50x11, but it will get me around 30 mph at a comfortable cadence. Do people really ride faster than that when they aren't coasting downhill? I certainly don't.

I used to use a 1x10 setup on my CX racing bike. I went back to 2x10. The main reason I switched back was dropped chains. This was before clutch derailleurs and narrow-wide chainrings came into vogue. I was using an unramped chainring and a N-Stop chain watcher. I dropped the chain in several races, including once when I somehow managed to get the chain behind the chain watcher and had a rough time getting it back on. I don't think I've ever dropped a chain in a race with a 2x10 setup, though I have done it in practice. Apart from CX racing, I would guess that I average a dropped chain maybe once every two years. Usually it's because of incorrectly set limit screws on my front derailleur. I wouldn't choose equipment based on that.

I haven't done a direct comparison of weight between a 1xN and 2xN setup, but I would think it is minimal, certainly less than half a pound and probably closer to 150 grams.

I do think simplicity of use is an advantage of 1xN setups. It's significantly easier to reason about the shifting pattern when your brain is running low on oxygen. That said, I firmly believe that the rise of 50x34 configurations has significantly increased the perception of this benefit. Transitioning from the small to the big ring on a 50x34 is a hassle and almost never intuitive. You need to plan. I never notice that problem with a 50-39-30 or 46-36. So to a large extent, I think 1x10+ is a solution to a problem that used to not exist and that the bicycle industry created for itself with a misguided product direction.

With 11 cogs I tend to think that wide gear spacing and limited range are extremely overstated as drawbacks of a 1x system. The expense depends on what you're doing. Most of us don't need SRAM Eagle. I got my 11-36 cassette for $25.

Jarrett2

I already have a Rival 22 setup on my bike, so I'm guessing I just need:

SRAM X-Sync Road 1X Chainring 46 Teeth 110mm BCD Grey, 10/11 Speed
$73.99

SRAM PC-1130 11 Speed Chain With Powerlock, 114 Links
$18.99

Shimano XT CS-M8000 11 Speed Cassette 11-42T. 11 Speed
$66.99

SRAM Rival 1 Type 2.1 Rear Derailleur Black, Long Cage, 10/11 Speed SRAM Road
$99.00

Order Total = $258.97

Am I missing something? Seems like a fairly inexpensive conversion. Also easy to reverse if I don't dig it.

There is a local shop is has converted several racers and a few rec riders to this setup and they seem pretty happy with it thus far. He says you drop half a pound from the bike and gain reliability, power and less noise.

Andy_K 

You gain power? I must have built mine wrong.

HTupolev

You forgot to buy it with the seat tube motor option.

Jarrett2

I dunno. That was one of his selling points. I forget the spiel already. Something about a study published showing more power due to increased chain tension, I think. It wasn't a selling point for me, I didn't pay that much attention

corrado33

You gain power? No, that is physically IMPOSSIBLE, and a ridiculous statement at that. Where is the "less noise" coming from? You do realize that the front derailleur never touches the chain unless you shift... right? So, essentially, if you stay in a single chainring, your bike is identical to a 1x setup in terms of noise... right? Or am I missing something here? Oh yeah, I am, most people with 1x setups run a chain catcher/anti drop device which many of them DO touch the chain constantly. Don't believe me? Here's an entire article about "drop proofing" 1x setups.

Mechanical Monday: Drop-Proofing a Cyclocross Drivetrain - Cyclocross Magazine - Cyclocross News, Races, Bikes, Photos, Videos

Here's another.

https://www.bikehugger.com/post/view/cyclocross-1x



Sounds like the salesperson is trying to sell you a bunch of placebo pills for a hefty price.

This is typical of BF threads. A person comes on thinking that technology X is the best thing ever and they ABSOLUTELY NEED it (a la the titanium spokes thread.) People who have seen and worked with technolog X say it's ok, but the proposed "gains" are mostly hype and it's not really worth going out and spending a lot of money to upgrade to. OP hopelessly defends his technology using obviously false statements in a hope to convince everybody else.

Everybody else is not fooled.

Eventually OP stops posting when people start pointing out that they are wasting money and the things they thought aren't really correct.

Jarrett2

lol, you're fussy little feller

I'm not selling anyone anything. I'm having a discussion about drivetrain options on a bike mechanics subforum. I appreciate your input despite it being heavily biased.

Did you read the part where I already have a 1x setup on a bike I own? No dropped chains, no chain slap, less noise is what I am currently experiencing with it. I'm just not that fired up about the gear range on the one I have.

I'm just kicking around the idea of trying a more road specific setup on my road bike. Not trying to sway an election or anything

Bike Gremlin

All good points, agree with most.

I think 46-30 would be a better double - just one shift for hills, while 46 would cover all the flat and slight uphill riding. Cross chaining and shifting patterns wouldn't be an issue.

One more thing. No one really needs faster than 50-14 combination. However, it's better to ride 50-14, than 40-11 - more efficient, less component wear. If there were cheaply and widely available cassettes starting from 14 teeth (apart from 6 speed ones), I'd go for those.

11 speed 11-36 cassette doesn't have big gaps, that's true. But neither does a 13-28 7 speed one - that costs under 10 euros, lasts long, along with a 12 euro chain. That's what I choos, with a triple crankset. More durable, more reliable, a lot cheaper, wider range, same gear gaps (if not better).

Unless you're racing, you should have enough mental capacity for gear changing, in spite of exhaustion - you're not riding closed roads, need to look out for traffic, so can't push yourself until you loose the tone and the picture anyway.

Andy_K 

I know you're correct about this, but I dream of the day when I wear out an 11T cog.

I do have a 13-25 Ultegra cassette. They made them (and 14-25) for junior racing back in the 6600 days.

Bike Gremlin

ride 11 regularly (with a 40 largest chainring) and it will get worn quickly.

cny-bikeman

Pros

• Less weight - not a big deal, but true
• (Fewer) moving parts, things to break - Technically true, but I've never had a front derailleur or shifter break, one broken cable in well over 100k miles.
• More simplified - This one redundant with the fewer moving parts one above
• More reliable - Many 1x10 setups have more problems with dropped chains, can cede that some people are more challenged with front derailleur setup.
• No compensating... - If you mean adjusting to eliminate rub, true
• No dropped chains - no guarantee of that at all, can be more of a problem on 1x, especially wide range, and I've never had a problem with dropped chains on double or triple.
• No chain slapping - only an issue off-road
• Quieter drivetrain - No mechanical reason for that to be true. It would be extremely difficult for my 3x drive train to be quieter than it is. Further, the large/large crosschain combo would necessarily be noisier than the equivalent ratio with a small chainring.
• (Added) Less cog wear due to smaller chainring using larger rear cogs for same gear ratio

Cons

• Larger gaps - MUCH wider gaps at two different points, and your avoidance of double shifting makes the other differences look smaller than they actually are, as you leave out many of the ratios available on the small chainring.
  
  (Added)
• More noise in lower gear ratios
• Shifting on small cogs somewhat compromised (larger distance to top pulley due to requirement for larger cog capacity).
• More chainring wear due exclusive use of a smaller chainring
• Conversion expense and time
  

I know for the OP's particular preferences and riding style the Pro's have more weight, but I feel the revised list is a more accurate assessment in general.

T Stew

In all fairness it can be made to work without all those adapters, at least with an 11-36t cassette. I've heard Shimano 9speed mountain RDs like M772 or M972 will usually handle 36t (I think spec says 34 max but folks often get a bit more) and they also work with Shimano 10 speed STI. As a matter of fact I am thinking of doing just this on another bike with no adapters at all. My adapter is because I wanted to use Campy Ergopower instead of Shimano, I just like them better. If I wanted to run STI's I wouldn't have needed that JTEK at all. And the dropped hanger was to use the DA7800 which I just happened to have laying around with the 7800 crankset I intended for another project but changed my mind. Or alternatively, I've heard the Campy Ergos will work natively with SRAM 1:1 RDs, and support 36t cassette, so no adapters needed their either. I'd just have to buy another RD but part of the reason for doing what I did was for cost savings, but I am not entirely opposed to trying one just to see if I can get one cheap on ebay or something. I think it's great that this stuff can be made to work together instead of having to use each companies proprietary parts. Some call this ingenuity I find this stuff way more interesting than someone taking the easy route of just buying an all in one groupset solution.


Haters going to hate I guess.

This isn't some new revolutionary technology we are trying to push on everyone else as way better than anything else. It has some advantages and some disadvantages. Some of the advantages are way overstated by some proponents, and some of the disadvantages are way overstated by some of the opponents. But I am pretty sure there really isn't anything super special technology wise about this, and it works quite well usually. In fact I am fairly certain in my case it was better in every way than the drivetrain it replaced, including range and spacing. Sure, a modern 2x setup may even be better range and spacing, but not everyone is so fussy about incredibly tight gear spacing. I never use the small chainring up front except for the final granny gear when I am down to the largest cog. So only 1 of all those extra gears even means anything to me. Remember there is a whole subforum here of thousands of users that ride on vintage 6 or 7 speed freewheels and are quite happy with them.

We aren't trying to fool anyone here (well maybe some who overstate things), but you also don't have to try to squash this as some nonsensical ridiculous stuff with no purpose. Everyone has different wants/needs for a bike. And just because a lot of people do something a certain way doesn't mean its correct all the time for everyone. Some of us do quite well with alternatives. Not everyone needs carbon fiber, team jerseys, clipless shoes (or even shoes at all ) or even *gasp* a front derailleur.

I have two more 1x road projects in the works... one will be for a race build, the other a fast road bike.

Bike Gremlin

Agreed. Yes, up to 10 speed STI can work with up to 9 speed MTB RDs, without adapters. So a 10 speed 1x system could work that way.

I wrote a series of articles regarding component cross-compatibility:

Compatibility Archives - Cycle Gremlin

If you find it helpful. I'd also appreciate 1st hand feedback on 12 speed systems compatibility with older stuff, to fill it in for future reference by all concerned.

T Stew

But anyhow, back to the actual question...

The 10-42 is a neat idea, as well as the new mega range Eagle groupset with the crazy 10-50 12 speed. But the problem is both are very pricey and require special hubs.

Using Sheldon's calculator with your 50/34-11/32 combo... a 46x11/42 comes pretty darn close and would be a better value and compatible with standard 11 speed wheels.

For example in gear inches...
50-11 = 119.9
34-32 = 28

46-11 = 110.3
46-42 = 28.9

You'll loose the equivalent of the 11 cog on your 50/34 setup... (50x12 is 109.9 so right about the same as your top gear on 46x11). Personally I don't mind coasting down a big hill, but some who really want to go fast would be limited.

These aren't specifical 1x 'road' setup but rather MTB components. Most SRAM now is all compatible 1:1, exact actuation, etc. You can mix road shifters with MTB derailleurs and cassettes from what I have read but I have not tried it personally yet.

hatrack71

Weird question. Is the single ring up front a trendy thing like fixies? If you really need all the range and don't want a front derailleur or extra chainring for whatever reason, why not get a SRAM Dual Drive rear hub? As soon as you convert to a single, you'll wish you hadn't if you take that bike everywhere with you. I've tried what you are contemplating and it just limited me on where I could go gearing wise with no detectable difference in weight. I don't even think I rode it for a day before I put the chainrings back on. But I cover lots of hilly terrain here. Extra chainrings are way cooler than walking your bike up a hill...if that's what the worry is. :^)

Jarrett2

Thanks. I was looking a 46 or 48 with the Shimano 11-42 cassette that fits regular wheels. Someone else in the thread mentioned they never shift to the little ring unless they need to bail out into the granny gear on a sudden steep incline. I'm the same way. I'm in the 50 ring 97% of the time. Which makes me wonder why I need the 34 and front DR at all if its only just for the occasional steep hill.

I ride regularly with a 34-28 with no issue. Occassionally, I'll go ride in the mountains somewhere and appreciate the 32 setup. So technically, I don't need to cover the range of a 11-32, but it would be nice to have just in case.

My main concern with 1x is the gears I'll lose and if they will bother me. I don't know if there is a good way to tell without trying it for myself.

dr_lha

...and this post is also typical of BF, getting super angry about someone else wanting to try something they personally don't think is a good idea. @Jarrett2 already has a 1X bike, what's the problem with him wanting to try it out on his road bike?

I guess I just don't understand why when people ask about stuff like this, we always have to have someone come in and explain why it's a terrible idea.