LesterOfPuppets

If there isn't a right friction shifter that'll handle the throw it would probably be not do difficult to modify one to do so.

Probably want to use shimano derailleur, though. Sram rear derailleurs need more cable pull.

Sir_Name 

Interesting write up dddd​.

RobbieTunes

It was.

The double-tap took a bit of practice to learn, and I still am not enamored of the double-tap system.

I formed 2 new habits:
1-looking back and down at the rear to see what gear I was in, as the ratios were so far off of my norms.
2-tryng to shift the L brake lever.

This is akin to when I first rode STI's, I kept reaching down to the DT to shift...
It takes a while to get used to "do I need to shift or mash a bit?" same as "do I need to shift or should I just spin a bit?"

Riding, to me, is a free-flowing system. I spin my legs and try to stay smooth, and I get used to what gears I need to do that on a consistent basis. The learning curve of the 1x10 was steeper than I envisioned from that perspective. I'm sure I'd have picked it up, but I sold the bike. When I build another gravel bike, I'm going with pretty much the same thing.

gomango

Friends don't let friends ride SRAM.

As far as 11-50 goes, I survived a week last summer in Moab with a 11-36 on my Niner.

For an old guy, I did just fine most of the time.

I am going with the same set up this summer on my Fargo.

It's pretty amazing the muck, rocks and sand I can get through.

trailangel

That's Funny!
SRAM was the stuff that came on cheap department store bikes.

Paramount1973 

That thing must weigh a ton. All that to avoid a triple front crankset with a granny gear that weighs maybe 100 gm.

LesterOfPuppets

You can get 'em with Shimano and Falcon, too. If you're talking about department store bikes with gripshifts, the Sram units are better than Falcons or the dreaded Shimano Revoshift:

cyclotoine

Friends don't let friends not ride sram. Kidding.

But seriously, over the last 6-7 years I have been a pretty pro sram user. I was sold when road bikes were 10 speed and shimano came out with their first aero routed shifters. Sram worked so well and so crisp and reliable. Shimano was so finicky, I'd didn't take me long to fall in love with my sram red.

Remember when shimano was still 9 speed on MTB even as recent as 2010? Yeah I had a new bike with 9 speed XT that year. Sram was so much better. I was pretty pleased when Dyna-sys came out but then I got a 10 speed sram fat bike and it's pretty hard not to like. The X1 11 speed on my 29er is just the cat's pyjamas. Shimano is great stuff but so is sram and they are always a step ahead. Etap anyone? That looks amazing. And yeah if you are going to go electric get rid of the damn cables!

Darth Lefty 

I figured this was coming. People like the familiar 115% MTB shift spacing, but the 1x11 sets (at 10-42 or 11-42) didn't have the 5:1 range of a full system.

I wonder though how close the silly thing rides to the ground in bottom gear. With the added wrap and bigger cog it has to go lower, doesn't it?

https://www.sram.com/sram/mountain/t...gies/x_horizon

tashi

I haven't crunched the numbers on gear ratios for 45t, but a 42t doesn't give adequate range for my mountain bike. I doubt that I'd like the jumps with a 45t on 10 speed, and I'm not too interested in 11-speed drivetrains for my mountain bike.

But THIS could get me on a 1x system, which I would like to go to but haven't because of the lack of range.

SRAM has pissed me off too many times in the past however so the early adopters will have to do the product testing for me, something SRAM sure doesn't do enough of before they release a new product.

Darth Lefty 

It looks like they just stuck a 50 on the bottom of their 10-42, which makes the last few shifts kind of uneven. That's why the Shimano cassettes go 32-37-42

[TABLE="width: 518"]
[TR]
[TD]SRAM cog[/TD]
[TD]shift teeth[/TD]
[TD]shift ratio[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]even sequence[/TD]
[TD]shift teeth[/TD]
[TD]shift ratio[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]10[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]10[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]12[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]120%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]12[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]120%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]14[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]14[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]16[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]114%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]16[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]114%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]18[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]113%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]18[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]2[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]113%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]21[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]21[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]24[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]114%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]24[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]3[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]114%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]28[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]28[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]32[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]114%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]32[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]114%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]36[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]4[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]113%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]37[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]5[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]116%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]42[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]6[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]117%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]43[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]6[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]116%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]50[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]8[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]119%[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD="align: right"]50[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]7[/TD]
[TD="align: right"]116%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

verktyg 

Back in the 70's a friend built a 13-36T freewheel to run on his tandem with 4 chainrings 26-60T. He made long cages for the FD & RD plus a special BB spindle. There were a few times that the 26-36 stump puller helped on long steep hills.

What I've found is that I have a hard time keeping balanced pedaling at a 1:1 or lower ratio on a paved surface (26-26, 28-28 or 30-30). Off road especially in mud or soft dirt it's not as much of a problem because the tire sidewalls dig in and provide lateral stability.


One other thing that a front derailleur does is help keep the chain from falling off when your bouncing down a rough trail.


I used a 14-34T FW with 26-40T chainrings without a FD on the first off road 700c bike I built in 1976. I could "foot shift" from the 40T to the 26T. Once in the hills I was in the 26T most of the time. The 40T CR was for cruising on a dirt road or pavement.

Reincarnation I built in 1992:




verktyg

Chas.

Darth Lefty 

You probably already know this, but these systems use a special "narrow-wide" chain ring with alternating big teeth that go between the outer chain plates; and a clutch on the cage pivot to reduce slap.

eschlwc

more poetry!

dddd

As I mentioned earlier, the cage on a 1x system can be shorter by virtue of not having to handle the chainring changes. Also, this arrives in the era of no more 26" wheels/tires being fitted to race-quality bikes, so ground clearance was already made less of a concern.

Further, as the largest cogs are selected, the lower end of the cage has already been pulled well upward/forward, this presumably being when the most technical riding might be expected to be encountered. Also the "B" or mounting pivot doesn't move at all, which eliminates some of the wild swinging in all directions of the cage pivot, something I would expect to somewhat improve ground clearance at speed.
On other other hand though, any upward impact to the lower end of the cage while it is pointing relatively rearward would tend to dramatically increase chain tension, since the "B" pivot on these derailers is fixed-position (i.e., not sprung), which might have the derailer snapping free of it's mounting bolt if not outright snapping into large pieces(!). So methinks that a sprung or sacrificial element at the B-pivot adjuster is warranted, even if such a sprung device were heavily pre-loaded against a stop so as not to move at all in normal operation.

It occurs to me also that these 1x derailers might optimally swing the cage along an additional axis, over and above the motion axis, however virtual, that common parallelograms move around. Since there are no chainring changes to consequentially alter the indexing at the rear, the cage can now be made to angle inward and outward as needed to best effect running clearance at the bottom (where the chain is being fed onto the teeth) between the chain and the next-larger cog, while shifting across the stack of dished sprockets. Eliminating any chainring shifts really frees up the rear derailer design to work best in terms of shifting across the cassette, and I expect this new derailer will fully exploit that design freedom.

crank_addict

The e-bike hybrid fat bikes will probably take advantage of it.

Choke 

I have to say I don't 'get' the 1x thing at all -lots of big jumps between gears. Perhaps if I rode a MTB I might find some logical justification for it but sense I don't....

+11ty billion. After they killed the ARIS freewheels I'd walk first.

Ever heard of Mavic Mektronic?

Darth Lefty 

That's not what the figure that I posted shows, so I went and looked up some instructions, and they still give you the same old big-big +2 links for a hardtail, or +4 links for suspension, and indeed the cage is well forward. So I guess the figure is wrong.

cyclotoine

It is primarily a MTB thing yes, although becoming very relevant for cross. It seems odd that someone would complain about jump in gears in C&V since the C&V mantra is we don't need me gears and the continual justification for adding cogs in the back is less jump between gears. To be sure, a double still makes the most sense for all out cross country racing. And yes 1x means fewer gears, but simplicity is what people like about it, no dropped chains, no chain suck, simple fast shifts for hard riding.

Yeah. What's you point? I realize this is C&V, but how is Mektronic relevant to the current discussion other than it was ahead of it's time and didn't work so well back then?

cyclotoine

Exactly, it's a moot point. The chain is more likely to derailleur with a front derailleur now than on a 1x system.

Choke 

Yet a double ring with a smaller freewheel/cassette has the same range of gearing with smaller jumps in between. If it works for you that's great but I don't find any logical reason for a 1x system on a bike.

My point is that eTap isn't some huge innovation, just a refinement of something that was tried before. People act like SRAM is some kind of innovator (your "so is sram and they are always a step ahead")....there are very few 'new' ideas in the bicycle world.

pastorbobnlnh 

I'll stick with my 3X6 drive train on my '71 Paramount.



Only 12 gears!?! Pifffffffffff! My SRAM equipped Cannondale has 81 speeds (not all unique ). Triple crank: 42-32-22 X 9 speed cassette 11-34 X Dual Drive 3 speed IGH.



Actually, if I were to ever own a fat bike, it would seem that this set up would make a great deal of sense--- if the cassette could be bought for under $50 and the chain for under $30.

cyclotoine

Fair enough. Million of people see that advantage, most of them are mountain bikers. You stated you are not so it is not surprising you cannot see the advantage, since you don't participate in the sport and do not have extensive personal testing of the competing systems. That's fine.

Didn't say it was a huge innovation, but it is still a step ahead of the rest.

dddd

I've raced cyclocross since 1999 using a 12-32t cassette in back, and even with the bigger-than-needed 50t chainring, most courses can be done in the big ring.

I liked having the 24-38-50t triple on there though, as a fallen chain has somewhere to go besides falling to the bb shell and requiring a dismount to correct.

I can't count the times that a stubborn (that made two of us) competitor who I was battling with lost their chain off the chainrings and was not seen again until after the race, which has nearly saved me from a few cardiac events I'm sure.

Widely-spaced gearing steps are actually beneficial in situations requiring frequent accelerations from slow speed. Too many shifts delays one's acceleration, considering that one's rate of acceleration is much greater in the lower gears. On a road ride though, I can appreciate those 1-tooth gear changes when hammering near the front, but have learned to adapt to doing without such tight gaps because I usually am using DT shifters and most often use freewheels with only 4, 5, 6 or 7 speeds.

noglider 

This reminds me of Shimano's 10mm pitch system from the early 80s. It didn't catch on because the cost to conversion for everyone would have been high, but technically, it had a lot of merit.