I have one bike with a GRX RX810 48/31 crankset and I’m not a fan of the jump - I could live with a smaller big ring

I haven't voted. I think I'd choose #1 but only with a narrower range cassette, maybe 12-25 or even 12-23. Otherwise, I'd pick #2.

At the risk of being banned, I simply have to ask - is there actually any point to any of the endless discussions about gearing ? Really ?

Where is the endless discussion on gearing? I didn't ask this specific question in the past. If you're referring to the other thread someone said I derailed, well there weren't a lot of comments on that there. That's why I made this thread.

Anyway, I'm going to re-read some of my old threads to see where people get the impression it's the same topic.
EDIT: OK I found in 2024, I posted on future gearing about the possibility that maybe triple cranksets would disappear but a significant percentage voted for the triple cranks in this thread (not even the same topic anyway).
In 2023, I posted about two sets of combos but those were both 2x configurations.
In any case, I saw I posted threads on other topics like brakes, tires, so...
ANOTHER EDIT: And about mstateglfr here's a thread where he was arguing with another poster. What are some good bikes with stiff frames that can take at least a 32 tire size? and I found another negative message towards me in another one of my past threads.

​​​​​​36T or 40T chainring for 11-36T?

​​​​​​General ideas for a bike

​​​​​​Future gearing

​​​​​​Simple mechanical bikes vs electronic & hydraulic

​​​​​​All 8 speed groups worked well?

40/26 + 11-34T or 46/30 + 11-36T




Do I need to link more of them?

You forgot the one that spawned this thread, where Canadian Tire enjoyed some market research tips from the OP.

Listen, I sincerely appreciate the people who voted on my poll and made usefull comments. I like the comments like some mechanics don't like to work on CUES or Microshift Advent is still good. (If anyone is stuck with something you don't like you could always find Sunrace friction shifters.) I even liked the comments saying they'd prefer an Internal Geared Hub or single speed instead.
However, for those people who find other people's messages so offensive they have to criticise them, how about learning? The book Feeling Good by David Burns shows you how to identify negative thoughts and how to refute them. And also shows you how to discuss to resolve conflicts. Some of the people here seem to be showing signs of rumination (repeating the same thoughts for nothing rather than resolving them and moving on). You can ask yourself the questions: Do I have scientific proof I need to get that upset about someone else's comments? Will I resolve the issue by getting at them?
This behavior is concerning because if you google bikeforums you see the word toxic in the search. This might have a negative effect in keeping people here in the first place.

Always remember this is the internet and people will have opinions that others don't like and will say things they may not say in public. The internet is a great place but can feel toxic at times it is just the nature and when someone does go after the same question that others have asked in the past it can wear on people.

Getting back to bikes, there is no one solution but generally fewer gears with a wider range is not ideal. I always feel like I am searching for a gear that isn't there when I have fewer gears. When I had a 7 speed 11-32 I was miserable I would switch back and forth back and forth hoping magically that in between gear that was there on the 9 speed would be there but I wish the derailleur would work for 10 or 11 speeds so I could bump it up to a 36t.

Meh. That's too much math. Another reason I'm glad I went fixed! Less thinking, more spinning!

perhaps hybrid talk would be more appropriate in the hybrid forum. I bet less resistance would be found there too.

Ditto

You're welcomed to say which one you'd prefer.

Of the choices I'd take #3 but would prefer a 42t front and a 11 speed MTB rear (11-42 or 10-42). I've got my commuter bike set up similar to this with a 38 front and big tires, seldom use the 42 rear but often use the 11, so a step higher on the ring looks good to me. 42-11 is nearly the same top gear as a classic 10-speed with a 52-14 top gear.

I did. I would not on purpose choose any that you have listed.

Since more people voted for the 46/30 and 11-34T, I decided to look at more double combinations. I think a contender would be a 48/32 crankset and 11-38T cassette. That would be 22.9 to 118.6 gear inches which means you sacrifice less on the top end. The only thing though is you do have larger differences between the cogs in the cassette. Otherwise, the 48/36/26 crankset and 11-32T gives you smaller differences between both the chainrings and the cassette cogs.
The most extreme I can think of would be 48/36/24 and 11-36T.

After my derailleur froze up from salt, I built up a winter fixie. If I had significant hills to deal with, I might rethink that.

What is it contending for?

38T seems pretty unnecessary on anything ridden on the pavement. Or is this a mountain bike off road or a touring bike loaded to the gills with equipment?

Context would really help us understand your musings.

11-38 is pretty obscure

As long as your climbing gear is close to 1:1 it really shouldn't matter as the rest will sort things out. Unless you are racing when winter commuting that is. Been all over Quebec on a bicycle, it is definitly La belle province !

Fantastic question.

Well, carrying groceries on two racks is implied. I mean you're talking about using a bike as a mode of transportation.

Carrying groceries on 2 racks was implied?
Ha, that is even less implied than what you claimed was implied earlier(hill climbing and snow use).

You asked what type of gearing and drivetrain people would want for an inexpensive winter or rain bike...and just went from there. Apparently in that brief question, it was implied that hills would be involved, it was implied snow would be involved, it was implied transportation instead of recreation would be involved, and it was implied that not just 1 but rather 2 racks to transport groceries would be involved.

I guess now is a good time to clarify- have you been implying that this gearing and drivetrain should be used to power a rickshaw? Seems absurd, but no more absurd than to suddenly find out on page 4 that you have been implying it this whole time.

How and where did you imply that?

And two bags of groceries wouldn't be enough to have me needing a gear ratio as low as even a 30T rear on my small ring of 36T in the rolling hills around me.

Why are you assuming that I would carry anything with me when I transport myself on a bike?

That and belt drive, maybe with an Alfine 11.