Al.canoe

[QUOTE=willtsmith_nwi]From what you wrote, I know a lot about your shifting. Chewing up chain rings is very uncommon and implies a big problem somewhere. The term "major" is subjective. What I am saying that I can maintain a much higher average speed over my 18 mile course here in N Florida (minor hills) and do hills much better in the mountains (and some increase in average speed) by using all my rings a lot. I keep a log of my time to run trails and it's got about three years of data.

Most folks that I have observed don't shift nearly enough.

Scanning books in a book store obviously is not all that effective.

Al

Al.canoe

The folks I know in the mountain areas and here in Florida don't chew up their rings much less have switch to steel ones. Destroying equipment is a sign of poor technique in my opinion. Those who race successfully can't afford the demolition as they have to finish to win.

Possibly too much testosterone vice technique??

Why in the world would anyone ride with worn rings? Don't you laughing, high testosterone types do maintenance? Weird.

Yup, for me as I stated before, 34 is too low a gear for very steep tech stuff.

Al

3MTA3

the expert/cat 1/pro guys i know & have talked to go through chainrings & cogs like waterbottles. working in a shop we see a ton of busted up rings, esp from the top racers. on the roadie scene, campy's most expensive cogs wear out in no time, ironically enough. they're more concerned with weight than durability with that particular set & figure if you can buy them, you can buy more. rings are not bulletproof & have to be replaced frequently, depending on how much riding you do... notice i said "how much" & not anything to do with technique. it just like chains, too. they stretch. it happens. it's not like it's a weekly thing or even a yearly thing for most recreational riders (or even racers for that matter). heck, i haven't changed my chain or cogs since i got my bike in the spring of 2001 & i've ridden the s*** out of the thing... although they both need to be changed real soon, but some other issues on other bikes need to be addressed first.

as far as changing gears during a ride, i barely ever change from my middle front chainring here in michigan.

Al.canoe

I can certainly see the "type" of behavior as you describe. But many racers, including Overend, was very concerened about finishing and may go easier on the gear.

I check chain stetch regularly and get rid of mine as soon as I can force the guage "into" the chain. I've replaced outer two rings at about 2000 miles. They were not all that bad, but I enjoy slick gear operation.

One of the things Overend was noted for was never getting hurt. He was conservative and that includes using the front gear shift. Lopes on the other hand, seems much more aggressive and participates in more events than just XC.

Al

willtsmith_nwi

Are you a bicycle mechanic? Can you vouch for this? Or did you just fail to read this in Overend's book and assumed then that it just does not exist?

Aluminum is a soft metal and it wears much quicker than steel. Large men who put tremendous amounts of force into their cranks can very quickly reshape aluminum chainrings. I don't know what size you are, but you need to talk to some big guys who ride to find out what can break and what cannot.

If you are doing more ring shifts than cog shifts you are not getting better time. You're wasting it. And I don't understand why you cannot see that you are directly contradicting the advice of your MTB saint (Ned Overend). You're telling us that Ned Overend is wrong about his shifting advice, then you're telling us that single ring chain suck does not exist because Ned Overend didn't mention it. Now you're claiming that worn chain rings are rare based on ???? We're telling you that yes, Alloy chain rings do wear fast because we've worn them out. And for some reason you don't think we know about chain pitch.

In the front or in the rear? And what do you know about someone's comfort level in their gear. Why don't you talk to some singlespeeders about this issue and see what they have to say.

No, I READ the book. I sat down and read it in a couple of sittings. It had large print and it's really not that long. Plus pretty much everything in it is something most people pick up from experience. Why would I buy a book filled with obvious things like

?

Oh, maybe if I am A.Canoe and I can't draw logical conclusions between my citations and my arguments, then I'd want to have the book handy so I could go back and misunderstand it all again ... then I'd want to buy it. Maybe if I want to go and read the things that are NOT in the book and then draw irrational conclusions about the non-existence of things not contained within ... then I'd really want to have it handy. And of course, It's always convenient to have the book to make those "unquotes" in which you paraphrase the material but refuse to provide the actual text ... owning the book entitles you to say whatever you like about it. And of course owning a single book by a single author allows you to know everything about cycling. At that point the collected experience of people like Sheldon Brown, Leanard Zinn, Jobst Brandt, Jonathan Levy and others is all irrelevant. You read a book, you know everything now.

BTW, I'm not knocking Overend's book. It's a good book. So is William Nealy's book (which is a lot funnier). But these books are for beginners and they are NOT maintenance manuals (which we seem to agree on sometimes, but apparently not others (for example: at the point conclusions are made)). A.Canoe, please stop and go read the website on Chain Suck so you can fix your ignorance before posting any more about it.

royalflash

I have shimano XT and have never really been happy with the shifting. If it weren´t for the integrated shifting/brakes I would have junked them long ago. The integrated flippy shifting thing sucks big time.

Next chance I get I am getting SRAM.

brunop

rohloff speed hub.

CaptMatt15

The SRAM triggers are starting to grow on me... maybe i'll switch to them if/when i decide to go 9 speed some day...

goldfishin

sram rear and trigger shifters with a shimano front.

Cams

Thanks for all the feedback, I have finished the build and have gone with Shimano XT front mech and SRAM X7 triggers and rear mech. The combination seems trouble free and the shifting is very positive (on a superficial level the rear mech is a nice looking bit of kit as well). I will post some more feedback a couple of months into using it with any updates after initial impressions for anyone else who is in my shoes.

ussprinceton

Shimano

MrEaves

I had an SRAM X5 on my old cheaper bike, I have a Shimano Deore on my new more expensive bike. I must admit I prefered the SRAM.

Bikebros

Sorry. I disagree. Chain suck has nothing to do with rear derailleur (that part I agree with), but around here chainsuck is when the chain gets caught on the teeth and doesn't release at the bottom of the chainring (typically a granny gear thing). The chain gets "sucked" up usually binding between the granny ring and the chainstay - cause - worn granny ring, stretched chain and crud.

euroford

i hate my stupid sram x.9 drivetrain. i love tinkering on my bike, and the stupid drivetrain is so friggin reliable that i never have an excuse to get out the tools. the same can be said for that bonehead decision to go 1x9 with that rediculous mrp chainguide. no chainsuck, no dropped chains, no front shifter, just nothing to tinker with whatsoever. how boring, i just ride the dang thing everyday and never get to do any wrenching...

i'm thinking i should switch back to xtr, on my previous bikes i got to wrench on them constantly!

willtsmith_nwi

Hey, I heard they were auditioning for a new Maytag Repairman ;-) Sounds right up your alley ;-)

WayneN

I'm just a newbie and just purchased my bike today (with a sram shifters). But I have been trying out a few bikes with both Shimano and Sram shifters. I gotta say, I really like the thumb trigger action of the Srams, so there's my vote!