How pervasive is 1x in the pros?
 

I just read a profile of Matheiu van der poel's bike, and he is using Dura-ace di2 with double chaineings.

I had thought for a couple years that 1x had taken over the top level of cx, but I guess I'm wrong?

Is there any advantage to 2x for cx? Or do you think it is just because he is Shimano sponsored?

(it doesn't seem to be hurting his results)

1x seems more prevalent in the US. Almost all the euro pros are still running 2x, and when the euros come here they seem to still be running 2x. There is a real advantage to 1x for chain retention at the sacrifice of gearing jumps. I've made the switch to 1x this year and like it for racing, but hate riding it on the road.

well I Imagine he is sponsored by Shimano and that is what they want him to run. Pros are going to ride what they are paid to ride. However, When I go to the am cross races almost everyone has 1X. I think it is more telling what is better when you see what people have when they have full control and use their own money. I have raced with both and for me 1X is the way to go. The jumps in gearing dont have to be big either because you dont need as big of a range as you do on road. An 11-32 I feel can give you more than enough range on cross courses. I know people who do 1x with 11-28, I think there are times if its hilly that could make you run a little too much.

This is true, but I think it it has more to do with the range of power and useable gears amateurs need compared to pros in a lot of cases. I also run 1x and an 11-32 or 11-28 depending on the course, but that is more because I don't ever finding myself needing more than a 42x11. Some of the cat1/2 guys are using bigger gearing than that though

I think it would be interesting to see how much if at all the pros actually change front rings when running 2X in cross. Id be willing to be most of them throw it in the big ring and never shift down for most races. I have heard of some running 44/38 up front. I think That gearing would keep chain tension in the small ring better. My first season of racing I had a 46/34 up front. The chain drop was really only a problem if i ever went to the 34 for a hill or really deep mud. Since the rear derailler wasnt as stretched it would allow the chain to bounce more and sometimes come off.

for Cyclocross, manufacturers has offered 1 by stuff for decades .. Campagnolo has had toothless guard rings

for their 144 bolt circle cranks , in 4 diameters for 4 ranges of chain ring sizes.. I used their biggest one

to set up a very pretty 52 36 double fr om a triple , back in the 80's.. have a 110 38 to do My Rohloff bike..
got it from cyclocrossworld.com All City Chainring Guard |

Is the speed range in cx less than road?
I don't know, I am asking.

I think so. Road being 11->55mph (using even numbers) - 5X.
What is cross? 8->32mph? 4X. Seems less that riders dismount.

If the range is less, there is more argument for 1X.

Range is definitely less for cross. That's why cross bikes have come with a much narrower range (46/36) cranks for a long time.

As for 1x, I can't remember if it was van der Poel or van Aert but one of those was still on cantis last year. And Trek made a special canti version of the Boone for Nys. So if they wanted to run 1x they'd be doing it Shimano sponsor or not. One thing I've noticed is that most of them (vdP, vA, Sanne Cant) are running di2. I wonder if the electronic shifting is why they are sticking with 2x?

One of the reasons I've thought about going 1x for cx racing is that on some courses, the front derailleur is pretty much useless after a couple laps.

I'm told SRAM patent the narrow wide and does not bother suing the Wolf Tooth likes that use it. I have not looked that up to see if it is true. If it is true, Shimano has a stake in both selling the FD and their 2X front shifting which is the best anywhere.

Shimano has 1x drivetrains for mountainbikes (see XT M8000-1 cranks for example) so it isn't a patent issue.

It is the Narrow/Wide I'm referring to.
Are those narrow/wide teeth? If they were, I'd buy.
They do not look it:
http://bike.shimano.com/content/dam/...img.detail.png

It appears to be:
Chainring
EP 2602176 A1
ABSTRACT
A solitary chainring (50) of a bicycle front crankset for engaging a drive chain (10), including a plurality of teeth (52) formed about a periphery of the chainring (50), the plurality of teeth (52) consisting of an even number. The plurality of teeth (52) includes a first group of teeth (58) and a second group of teeth (60) arranged alternatingly between the first group of teeth (58). The first group of teeth (58) and the second group of teeth (60) are equal in number. Each of the first and second group of teeth (58, 60) include an outboard side (54) and an inboard (56) side opposite the outboard side (54) and each tooth of the first group of teeth (58) includes at least a first protrusion on the outboard side (54) thereof and each tooth of the second group of teeth (60) are free of the first protrusions on the outboard side (54) and the inboard side (56).

SRAM to license narrow/wide chainring design - BikeRadar

No, Shimano went in a different direction for chain retention. But the issue isn't narrow wide, the issue is 1x drive trains. Which Shimano can clearly do.

I think the reason you don't see a Shimano 1x cyclo-cross is that the market is very small.

I was not debating 1X. I stated

Which they did.

It could be.

Here is the mud rear for a 1X front. 11 spd, 11-36. Front is a narrow-wide. Right now SRAM Force. I expect we'll change it out after the season and do the Shimano front, and Wolf tooth ring.

I hope to see the tires next week.
Attachment 588494

You implied that Shimano is pushing 2x and front derailleurs because SRAM's patent on narrow wide chainrings prevents them (Shimano) from developing 1x. That is not the case given that Shimano does produce 1x drive trains.

With regards to your last post, your son would benefit from focusing on technique more than with your obsession with equipment.

I didn't imply. I stated something I thought to be true. I was not sure. You said I was wrong, I did more research, I was correct.

To comment on benefit, it helps if you know the goal. He's done one race and crashed - maybe equipment based, and another race and didn't. It is all new, but the equipment is a big part of the fun, for both of us.

If the goal is to support the bike industry by buying parts, then keep at it. If the goal is for your son to perform on races, focus on technique is where he'll see benefits since he seems to already have fitness.

As for Shimano, I just reread your post. You said that SRAM's narrow wide patent is the reason why Shimano has an interest in pushing 2x and front derailleurs. The fact that Shimano has 1x drive trains makes it clear that SRAM's patent doesn't interfere with them. Nor does every other 1x ring maker going to pay SRAM licensing fees. So yes, you are wrong. And I have better things to do than argue with your arrogant ass.

This thread is about equipment - aka parts.

I don't see a lot of cross earn-a-living pros. I'm around that level on road, and maybe MTB. Some riders we know do both - and cross better. I just look at their stuff.

Road is 2X and no plans to switch. Road TTs - not as much. Even a 1X with a FD / guide is too likely to drop a chain. I've switched to narrow-wide 54T 1X for the TT bike and the hill bike (44T) and would do so on a cobble RR. Chain drop can really mess up a ride and the narrow-wide seem to work better to me, although I'm comparing to derail-er rings. Some 1X rings just have longer teeth.

I think the range in cross, at least from the equipment I've seen is less, than MTB. As the same UCI 6.8kg weight limit applies I see benefit is dropping weight (where most road bikes are under that), and dumping a FD, and extra ring seems like a good way to go. Esp when the speed range is less.

At collegiate (5% pros) MTB nats there were hardly any 2X setups. Almost everything was the narrow-wide 1X front ring. Shimano was the neutral support and while there were lots of their pedals, shoes, brakes - most the front cranks were some narrow-wide variant. I associated that to it is preferred and Shimano does not have the patent. the patent part is fact, the reason is my opinion.

^ Kudos on not responding to the arrogant ass part.

When it comes to 1X v. 2X in the pros I'm sure it's a mixed bag: Part sponsorship, part personal preference. If you've used 2X most of your life and it works, why change it? People are creatures of habit if nothing else. That and perhaps you want the bigger gear range just in case, even if you maybe never use it. All of that aside, when I go to a geared set up it will be 1X.

I can see why [MENTION=364302]Doge[/MENTION] is into the gear. It's fun to think about, and it's not like he can have a direct impact on his son's ability to turn a corner in dirt.

Funny about the turn the corner. 1st cx race tires folded over and crashed and DNF'd. That is why I decided to get some better wheels.

The amount of disciplines and specialization now also make things different. I was chatting with kid's team director (new hall of fame inductee last week) who won elite cross nationals and he mentioned he just used his road bike then. Asked if that could be done now - nope. So doing cx, road, TT means at least one bike for each, when it used to be done with one bike for all events. Add MTB, track, hill climbing - also another at least another bike each.

On the topic, as the disciplines diverge a bit, each will get more specific parts. For road races, the FD and 2X, is going to stay. For hill climbs, TTs, crits, and MTB I see the 1X gaining as it is simpler, lighter and the range is not needed. 1X came on the two cross bikes we got - cause you need two. There was no need to change. The narrow-wide I see as an advantage. I was thinking of putting the Shimano road cranks on and the Wolf Tooth Narrow-wide. Likely not now.

On parts (seen if a few times in different threads)/ the personal advice I get on supporting the industry vs training methods. When my kid starts a new discipline he starts as a Cat 1. Parts do matter to a degree. Brand X vs Y, not as much. His wheels definitely matter. I don't see any podiums with those current wheels. There is a lot more support that goes into this than folks assume. It still costs money, but for youth elite racers there is a lot of help.
We also re-purpose all the time. Note the stem used this month in cx - same as in crit in 2014.

Attachment 588698

Attachment 588704

Shimano uses a narrow wide chainring as well so its not really a patent issue
http://cdn.mos.bikeradar.imdserve.co...as-630-354.jpg

I cannot find any current Narrow-Wide on the Shimano site. That Dyna-Sys II system is hard to find.

Do you have a link to where a Shimano Narrow-Wide can be purchased?

There are Dyna-Sys II pictures to be found in both configs. I can't find on Shimano. Home
http://www.evobikes.co.za/media/cata...8000_38t_1.jpg

http://www.tweekscycles.com/oncirrus...ismcrm81a2.jpg

Shimano XT M8000 SM-CRM81 Chainring | Jenson USA

https://www.backcountry.com/shimano-...0-1x-chainring

Patents can be pretty specific, and in the case of the Narrow-Wide, it may be that Shimano/Wolf Tooth either tweak their designs just enough to not violate SRAM's patent, or they pay a license fee to them. They might just be different enough to not be mired in legal stuff.

Why not more 1x in the pros? I dunno. For events like Koppenbergcross, I'd want all the gears made. But I'm mortal. [MENTION=364302]Doge[/MENTION], in case you're up for anecdotal, I'm running a wolf tooth ring and it's much better than the sugino track ring I was using....