Originally Posted by
DrIsotope
Absurd. Only the most fervent acolyte of marginal gains would ever put friction based on chain angle up against something like rolling resistance. And even if they did, the 1X chainline would only be more extreme in maybe 4 gears-- the top two and the bottom two. In the top two, friction doesn't matter because the hill is too steep, and it matters even less in the bottom two, because we have to ride our bikes in the atmosphere. The same soft argument could be made that 1X is superior to 2X because it's lighter-- no FD, no cable, just one chainring. My bike isn't 1X for weight. I don't care about the weight. Never been bothered by the chainline, either.
Relax, dude. I was just saying, as Lord tyrion said above, that if you consider "cross-chaining" to simply be larger chain angles, than you can indeed cross-chain in a 1x, and will end up doing it more often than in a 2x. If you don't care about friction losses, than that's fine. But as this thread has made so clear, everyone is a little different. No, nobody in here is going to be racing in the Tour next year (although some feel the need to post their strava stats, for whatever reason), but some of us genuinely enjoy and appreciate the mechanical side of the device known as the bicycle, and we might like knowing we are operating the bike efficiently, even if said efficiency isn't the key to winning a race.