3x1?
 

So, this is probably a stupid question, but does 3 gears in front and 1 in back not work?

You see lots of single speeds and some people do the 1x9. Most of my commute I'm happy to sit in one gear. Every now and again I go on the big ring and go fast for fun, and sometimes I take on the huge hill and drop down into my granny. I'd be happy with three gears if the range was good. Is that not possible with 3 x1?

well, for one, you can already get a 3speed with none of the problems of a 3x1.

i don't see why not. my mountain bike is a 2x1, (middle & granny chainrings), & it works great. there's no reason you couldn't use 3 chainrings. the only problem you may have is chain length. (making it not too short in the big ring, & not too long in the granny). go for it!

Chain length, or rather capacity to take up chain in the two smaller rings would be an issue. Since you'd still have to have a RD or chain tensioner to accomplish that, it would be much simpler to go 1x3.

Actually, now that I think this through a little, it would be really simple and easy to keep the 8, 9, or 10 speeds in back. Lots of CX bikes do this.

+1 yeah, 3 x 1 wont work.

I think you really lose the advantages of a single speed by going 3x1 and don't gain much advantage. You are better off running a wide range cog set in the back and a single ring in the front.

As mentioned previously you'd need a chain tensioner to take up the slack when you go from the big chainring to the small. Otherwise it would work. It's not a bad thought because it gives you some options over a pure single speed.

Personally though from a shifting standpoint I much prefer rear derailleurs. They seem to shift quicker and smoother.

Yea, it would work, but if you're going to have a tensioner anyway (as you would have to), you might as well have a dérailleur.

Personally, I'd much rather have a 1xX, assuming the bike allowed it.

you can go 2x1 with the use of a paul melvin tensioner if your frame has a hanger

Yeah, that thing is like $70 though. Nevertheless, it brings up a good point. You need a tensioner with a long enough throw, - like a mid to long cage derailleur (if you want a 3 X 1).

Thanks for the replies. I figured there was a simple reason it wasn't worth doing.

2x10 is better ... trust me

double double or 'Double D'
 

I have a dual front chain ring 36x39 and dual rear cog two speed ( White Industries 16-19) with a 15 inch spread 50 & 65 inch, which works fine for me. Any combo of three teeth apart works without a long rear dropout and is fine on standard horizontal drop outs with no change in axle position. This gives me a modest roller/flat gear and a lower gear for headwinds and hillier sections. On my commute it works perfectly. I do spin out the 65 often but I can cruise at 15-18 mph with ease and have hit 25 mph in a sprint through intersection light changes. No need for a tensioner. A Rivendell Quickbeam is another real nice deraileurless bike with the option of a 28 inch spread in gearing when using a two speed freewheel and another gear on the flip side. The long rear dropouts allow easy chain tension without a tensioning device. :50::speedy: