|
I commute on a racey bike I cobbled together with a 50/34 12-25 11 speed. It excels at letting you dial cadence if spinning is your thing. I was surprised at the earlier inforgraphics, from 75-90 rpm. I cruise at 90 rpm nearly 100% of the time, and when on group rides or playing in traffic, regularly get up to 110 or 120, and even higher on the trainer. the jump in each step is nearly 5% in some combinations, meaning one gear brings me from 113 to 108 cadence. for me, I LOVE to dial it that close - when sustaining high power over 1+ minute or even 3-5 min efforts, it makes a noticeable impact on perceived effort and comfort.
for the average sporty rider, the 50/34, in addition to being a better climbing gear, is designed to make an 11-28/32 cassette rideable for the average consumer. 53/39 is just too tall for *most* folks, in most road situations. also, triples on road bikes are out of fashion. |
Originally Posted by deapee
(Post 18708996)
I see a 50/34 as just essentially riding on the 50, and everything is usable from the 50, save from the 32 tooth gear in the back...then I have the 34 to climb. It just makes more sense, is way less messing around with the front shifter, and let's me focus on riding more.
This is basically why I think I will be OK with 50-34 for riding on the open road. Last night I climbed the hill to my house (which is about 3/8 mile at 8% and 1/8 mile at 16%) with the 34-29 combination. The 8% section wasn't bad at all. I wouldn't have lasted much longer than I needed to at 16% but I can only climb a grade like that for so long with any gear before I just get off and walk. Most of the paved climbs I see around here don't spike above 8% for very long. And, of course, 50T is good for cruising on open roads. That said, the whole reason I started this rant in the commuter forum is that when I'm commuting I'm constantly crossing back and forth over that threshold where the 50T ring isn't really comfortable. Seeing so many response that are some variation of "just use the 50T all the time" doesn't really change how I feel about this. I know some people have more open road on their commute, but I don't think it's typical. |
Originally Posted by GeoKrpan
(Post 18708895)
I had to scroll up, yep, this is the commuting forum. You are referring to high end hybrids?
I'm only pointing out that you do this thing where you say "I prefer X," and think that's equivalent to "Shimano would find it in their best interest to make X," presumably because they would then make large bundles of cash by doing so. When it's abundantly clear that Shimano has made a different calculation, and they're probably in a better position to know than you, Some Random Guy. |
Originally Posted by cyccommute
(Post 18708729)
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.
Of course there isn't much to stop me from using the triple with the same 10-42 cassette to make an incredibly stupid (by most people's standards but not necessarily mine) drivetrain. I'll grant you that having a 130" top gear is a bit over the top. So let's drop change to a mountain bike crank...44/34/22. This gives a range of gearing from an almost usable 118" gear to a hill crawling 14" gear. This is, by the way, incredibly close in gearing to what I run on my touring bike...a 46/36/20 with an 11-36 rear cassette. The 1x is stuck in high gear A 50/39 would actually be a better set up than a 50/34 in terms of the shift pattern. It has fewer holes. Compact doubles have huge holes in the shifting pattern that require weird triple shifts or huge changes in cadence when you shift from one range to another. Comparing a 50/34 compact with an 11-36 to my setup, you can see how unsmooth the transitions are. Someone who "mostly uses the 39t gear" should learn how their drivetrain works and how to get more out of it. Adventure Cycling did an article on drivetrains recently and they quoted the guy who has pushed for 1x systems at Sram as saying something along the lines of changing the ring on a 1x completely changes the character of the bike. He suggested using one ring for fast pavement tours and another, lower, one for gravel grinding. I happen to agree with him that changing the ring can have a very large impact on the character of the bike. I just happen to carry the rings on the bike and have this mechanism for switching between them without having to stop, get out my tools, remove the crank, fish the ring out of whatever bike it's in, change out the ring, install the crank and start riding again. Simplicity is all well and good if it does something for you. If it just places limits on you, it's not good. |
Some random guy calling someone, some random guy.
Originally Posted by grolby
(Post 18709025)
You were the one talking about 1x11 drivetrains. Not many hybrids coming with 1x11. Not a lot for sale, either, with the compact cranks @Andy_K started the thread to discuss. More of them than with 1x11 setups, though.
I'm only pointing out that you do this thing where you say "I prefer X," and think that's equivalent to "Shimano would find it in their best interest to make X," presumably because they would then make large bundles of cash by doing so. When it's abundantly clear that Shimano has made a different calculation, and they're probably in a better position to know than you, Some Random Guy. |
I just rode my 50-34, 11-40 drivetrain bike to work, 26 miles ranging from very hilly to flat. I was in the 34-40 combo 4 times, and the 50-11 never. I was trying to think about my "shifting patterns," but got bored with that pretty quickly and enjoyed the scenery instead.
|
Originally Posted by gsa103
(Post 18708810)
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.
On the other hand, there is really no need to ride in any of the gears below the 21 or 19 because those gears are duplicated else where. I tend to use the inner ring only on the lower gears of the cassette in any situation. By the time I would need the higher gears on the low range, I'm already moving fast enough that I want to shift up anyway. If you were having problems doing an upshift on a mountain bike...or any bike for that matter...under load, there is something wrong with the mechanism. Downshifts can be tricky under load because you are depending on the spring in the derailer to knock the chain off and it may not be strong enough. But on upshifts, you are using the cable to drag the chain up and can put a whole lot more force on the system. That's actually one of the failings of the way front derailers are designed. They should use the cable to drag the chain off the higher gears into the lower ones. Suntour did this long ago and the downshifts were far easier but the mechanism never caught on.
Originally Posted by gsa103
(Post 18708810)
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.
|
In regards to 1x12,14 and higher, the dropout spacing is going to get wider. And as far as gearing...I dunno, ride what works for you. Some people here don't need anymore than a single speed to get where they want to go. I've done my commute a number of times on a 42 pound 3 speed. Compact doubles also work quite well for me. If I lived in the mountains, I may want a triple instead. Anyway, ride what you want, and drink plenty of dubbels.
|
Originally Posted by grolby
(Post 18709047)
Triples undeniably have advantages over the alternatives. But that doesn't matter. 1X and double cranks with wide-range cassettes have a different set of advantages, and many people seem to prefer the trade-offs they make. It's sort of like disruptive innovation in bike components - the new thing doesn't have to be better in every single way to be preferred by the market. Expecting that everyone should just learn how to deal with a triple chainring drivetrain is a non-starter. When you start talking about the virtues of putting together a totally non-standard, customized setup, it just gets ridiculous. I'm a massive bike nerd and I sure don't want to deal with that crap! People want to ride bikes, not take a continuing education course on managing their drivetrains. It's not a bad thing to accommodate that.
The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible? Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway. |
Originally Posted by cyccommute
(Post 18710019)
I can't see any "different set of advantages" that 1x and compact double cranks have for many outside of racing. If you know your course, a 1x system can be tuned to take the best advantage of it. But if you are just out riding and encountering very different terrains, the 1x systems fall flat on their face. Most of us don't ride a closed loop all the time and would do better with a multigear system with a wide range.
|
Originally Posted by cyccommute
(Post 18710019)
I can't see any "different set of advantages" that 1x and compact double cranks have for many outside of racing. If you know your course, a 1x system can be tuned to take the best advantage of it. But if you are just out riding and encountering very different terrains, the 1x systems fall flat on their face. Most of us don't ride a closed loop all the time and would do better with a multigear system with a wide range.
The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible? Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway. BTW This was really funny. "I just happen to carry the rings on the bike and have this mechanism for switching between them without having to stop, get out my tools, remove the crank, fish the ring out of whatever bike it's in, change out the ring, install the crank and start riding again." |
Originally Posted by bmthom.gis
(Post 18710056)
not just racers, but those of us over here on the East Coast can get away with less gears as well. I doubt I will be taking my mountain bike to actual mountains, and the local trails we have here would be completely suited to a 1x...and stronger riders can and do get away with single speeds as well. My commute could also easily be done on a 1x10, and riding around in the city is often done on a 3 speed or single speed. I don't think I could get away with that so much in Denver. I don't think I'll be changing my Fred Sled over to a 1x system, ever.
I would say that I have bikes that I commute on. I don't have a "commuter" bike. All of my bikes have done commuting duty but they have also been ridden in a variety of different terrains. My "main" commuter bike has been ridden over Colorado passes and on long rides along the Platte River (definitely flat) and on commutes where I take the long way around which includes riding over the saddle of a mountain (but still not as steep as those damned eastern mountains). Basically, all of my bikes have to be ready to handle any terrain because I never know what I'm going to do with them. |
Wow, this thread is something else. I like my compact double. Don't do any long tough climbs, every I can do in the big ring up front. If the wind hits 30mph I either drop down to the small gear or wish my big was a 53, depending on the direction of the wind.
Lately I've thought about going to a 53 just so I spin less when drafting trucks. |
I have commuter bikes with 1x11, 2x11 and 3x9. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. There are many good reasons to go with a 1x setup: less weight, simpler shifting and lower cost not having to get a FD, shifter and extra chainring(s). 1x11 is new to me, and so far works great. Not saying it will work well for everyone, but for a relatively flat commute with lots of little hills or stop and go, it could be perfect.
|
Oh man.
My newest bike has a 50-34 crankset. When I take it back to the shop tomorrow, I'll demand they replace it with a triple, because the Internet sez 50-34 is bad for me. Seriously though, I think I could live with a 1x11 drivetrain. I test rode a Kona Private Jake that had a 1x11. Fun ride but the geometry was a tad too aggressive for my taste, and with the combo of 40T front and max 32T rear, climbing a hill on it was more challenging than the other bikes I test rode that day. Acceleration was a blast though. Would have loved to try the Kona Rove ST, which is also 1x11 but with a 38T chainring (same as my Breezer) and an 11-36T cassette - that combo looks a lot more climb-friendly. The lion's share of my cycling has been on the Breezer, so I wouldn't miss the top speed of a 40T or greater chainring anyway. |
Originally Posted by GovernorSilver
(Post 18711794)
My newest bike has a 50-34 crankset. When I take it back to the shop tomorrow, I'll demand they replace it with a triple, because the Internet sez 50-34 is bad for me.
|
My primary commuter has a 50-34 crankset paired with a 11-32 11 speed cassette. Right now, it the perfect range for me. I like to spin and average 95 rpm, generally cruising at 17-25mph on my commute (unless it is icy or snowing). My commute is mostly flat, with a few gradual hills. I mostly use the 50 unless there are mean headwinds, or I take the long way home with lots of climbing. I had a 46-36 and found I was spinning out too often in the 46.
|
Originally Posted by grolby
(Post 18709025)
You were the one talking about 1x11 drivetrains. Not many hybrids coming with 1x11. Not a lot for sale, either, with the compact cranks @Andy_K started the thread to discuss. More of them than with 1x11 setups, though.
|
Originally Posted by San Pedro
(Post 18710211)
Wow, this thread is something else. I like my compact double. Don't do any long tough climbs, every I can do in the big ring up front. If the wind hits 30mph I either drop down to the small gear or wish my big was a 53, depending on the direction of the wind.
Lately I've thought about going to a 53 just so I spin less when drafting trucks. |
Maybe I'm not very picky about my commuting gears. 1x8 42/11-30 or 32 is OK for me.
|
Originally Posted by alan s
(Post 18708479)
No need. The 1x12 will take over soon enough, and then 1x14, skipping the unlucky number 13. Rohloff will then serve no useful purpose, other than relieving you of your money. Someone will need to solve the chainline issue or make a super narrow chain.
|
Originally Posted by Andy_K
(Post 18711810)
You don't have to demand a triple. A 46-34 setup would be OK too. ;)
I've been accident-prone enough that you never know when a future mishap will result in the destruction of a chainring, necessitating a replacement crankset. Is there a Shimano 105 version of a 46-34? I just see alternatives with more teeth, not less. |
Originally Posted by jyl
(Post 18705805)
Seems like you could stay in the 50 ring all the time. Why even go to the 34 ring, except for a significant hill?
With 10 and 11 speed cassettes and their small steps between cogs, what the world needs is a FD that will shift between 55 and 26 rings, a chain flexible enough for cross-chaining, with electronic shifting that allows purely sequential shifting. Then you could run 55/26 x 11-23 10 or 11 speed. Huge gear range, no overlap, adequately small steps for commuting, and simple "up down" shifting. |
When I first got a 9-speed cassette I was moving up from a 7-speed system. I gave it some though and then decided that I liked the idea of keeping a closely space 7-speed setup and keep the other two cogs bigger to use as bailout gears. Thus, on that bike I'd ride it as if is was a 7-speed cassette most times but I had the option of using two much lower gears when hitting bigger hills or hills with headwinds.
I kind of liked the 50-34 crankset but that was partly because of the drilled rings. That crankset is in my wall ornaments box now. the really nice thing with cassettes is that you can make up your own to match YOUR requirements. Cheers |
Originally Posted by GovernorSilver
(Post 18713017)
Good to know. ;)
I've been accident-prone enough that you never know when a future mishap will result in the destruction of a chainring, necessitating a replacement crankset. Is there a Shimano 105 version of a 46-34? I just see alternatives with more teeth, not less. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:57 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.