Bike Forums - View Single Post - Why 50-34 sucks for commuting

04-21-16 | 05:17 PM

#70

gsa103

Senior Member

Joined: May 2013

Posts: 4,400

Likes: 106

From: SF Bay Area

Bikes: Bianchi Infinito (Celeste, of course)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyccommute

I dare you to try and match the range I can make on a triple with little effort. Shimano and other companies stock triples can almost be matched but the magic of a triple is that I don't have to go with the "stock" version. Going back to Dirk Freeken's gear calculator, it's easy to illustrate how limited a 1x11 system is. A 38 tooth front with an 10-42 rear cassette gives a similar range as the middle of a stock 50/39/30 with an 11-34 cassette. But if I change the 30 tooth inner to a 24 tooth inner, I increase the range of the triple significantly over the 1x11 system. I could increase the size of the ring on the 1x system to get the same high but the low suffers. I could decrease the size of the ring to get a similar low but the high suffers. Pick your poison.

The problem is those non-standard configurations greatly exceed Shimano spec's. A 9-speed Shimano Deore LG has a wrap capacity of 45t, which is basically maxed out by the 50/39/30+11-34 cassette. If you go to a 24t front, you're unable to use the smaller half of the cassette while in the granny gear. That's fine, but hardly a system suitable for the average rider. I personally rode a bike like that for a while, it was incredibly frustrating, because I was continually running out of gears while in the granny, and since it was a mountain biking, shifting the front wasn't an option due to load. I gave up, replaced the large ring with a bash guard and haven't looked back.

I agree than 1x systems are limited, for example, the local hills are too steep for me to handle with a 1x mountain bike. At the same time, the wide range cassettes have really eliminated the need for triples, which basically just add a gear in the middle.

Reply

0