Don't get all nostalgic for the old school cranksets. QC wasn't any better...nor probably any worse...than it is today. New rings and cranks are actually stiffer and shift better than any old school crank you care to name. I would not trade my Shimano XT nor my Race Face Turbine (2000 version) nor my Race Face Deus for a Sugino AT from 1983...and the AT was a good crank and a great touring crank in 1983. But dropped chains and balky shifting are things of the past for the most part because the rings are better made.

As for the problem of ring wobble, do you really think that a little wobble of a chainring is going to have much influence on where a flexible chain is in the rear? We're talking about a chain that will deflect a large percentage of an inch from front to back if you are cross-chaining and a very small amount of wobble in a chainring (fractions of a millimeter) if there is any. If the chain were a rigid structure chainwheel wobble might be a problem but the chain is far from rigid.

Take a chill pill cyccocommute. You think you know it all, but unfortunately you don't. You seemed to downplay my 2x10 system and yet you had never toured on one nor accept that others who have it found it adequately. Personally, I'm not sure why are you so angry and dismissive of old cranks. It is a reference to what was then better accountability in the industry and where makers are proud to showcase their quality products. Sort of like full service airlines. These days, everything is on a per-charge basis with discount airlines. It's a reflection on today's economic reality. I'm not saying you have to spend $400 to $500 on a set of Rene Herse or T.A if you can find one, I'm just illustrating what happens if you have a set of good cranks. I also had a set of Shimano XT and Turbine Cranks and while they are good, they are not as true chain ring wise compared to my Sugino cranks. I measured. Am I anal about being a bit wobbly? Nope.

Keep in mind that Jan Heine charges $85 per chain ring on the larger sizes and $55 on the smaller sizes, which are more pricier than what Vuelta USA would charge you for the same chain ring size. Anyone can decide what is important. There is no right nor wrong. You always try to make it like that in any discussion.

Cheers..

It doesn't matter anyways. Touring bikes evolved as a purpose built offshoot of the roadbike community. I started touring with a late 70's Raleigh Grand Prix with Blackburn Racks and red Cannondale bags. I thought that 2x5 setup was pretty good and the bike did everything I wanted it to do. Flash forward to last year and you would find that I upgraded my Cannodale T1 drivetrain from a 3X10 sport touring setup to a 3x9 touring setup. But I made a small, but not worthwhile changing, mistake. I kept to the roadbike theme of my youth and didn't take into account of where I think future touring bike drivetrain influences will come from.

In my opinion, touring bike drivetrains will be more influenced by the mountain bike community. If I was upgrading the T1 drivetrain today, the 13-36 9 spd cassette plus Deore shifter would remain but the crankset would be replaced with a 38/24 9 spd trekking double. Well not quite. I would probably put the 12T cog back on the cassette.

The 2x10 mountain drivetrain is fantastic. Ask anybody who has tried one out. It's the future for both mountain biking and touring. But that's only my opinion. I'm riding a triple and it works quit fine and I'm certainly not complaining. Al

Nun and Cycco, this is what I was referring to (I cant believe you guys thought I was mixing up teeth and 9 or 10 speed systems...come on, Im a gearing nerd amongst a bunch of gearing nerds! ;-)
Plus, I dont follow bike magazines at all, so I wasnt sure if there are in fact cassettes with 10tooth and 9 tooth cogs, as disktrucker referred to when he said "some people were disappointed they didnt go down to a 9 tooth cog"
No matter, it just made me think how for me, I dont like being on a 11 tooth cog for the sound I perceive, and wondered if its just me?

ps, just read the responses after I saw Nuns post, as I hadnt read them. ya its probably derailleur alignment a bit, but I should clarify that I "feel" a difference through my feet slightly (and no, its not as blatant as the chain hitting a screw or whatever) and Im pretty sure I am feeling the chain being more "bunched" around a smaller diameter--but I admit I am talking about a small difference here.

yup, which for the vast majority of the time is how I ride my drivetrain, Im convinced it plays a part in long drivetrain life (along with keeping it reasonably clean and lubed properly)

Had a fun ride on the tandem on Sunday. My stoker is sick so I recruited a strong fellow about 30 years younger than I. Actually he volunteered, drooling. We have 52-39-26 in front, so I swapped out our usual 12-34 cassette for a 12-27. Could have used a 12-25, but didn't have one lying around. My temp stoker is a good spinner so we really flew on the climbs with this rig. We, uh, destroyed the fastest riders in our little cycling community over 60 miles and 3100'. Can't say that tandems can't climb. Great gearing. We stay in one ring or another, just shifting the back, until we are done with that terrain feature. Anyway, a chainring set like that makes a very versatile bike. Just swap out the cassette for touring load or change in weight or training status.

Sorry, I just hadn't heard of 9t cogs, 10t yes, but not 9t.........that just seems a bit tight of a radius.

I don't think it is just you. I feel a different sensation in the pedals when I drop down to my 11 tooth cog. I'm not sure how to describe it but it almost seems like I can feel every tooth as it comes around.

9t are coming on kids BMX bikes ( chainrings are like 4" across to go with it.)
, and Caprio Freehubs for small wheel performance bikes .. 9-26t cassettes.

I don't think you can fit a 9 tooth cog on a standard hub. There is a capreo cassette which only fits on a Shimano Capreo hub and is most commonly used on folding bikes to get higher top speed. Having said that, If you are having chain rub on the front derailleur, then it is not likely the rear derailleur is out of adjustment unless you have a Rapid Rise rear derailleur. All rear derailleurs mainly default to the smallest cog without cable pull, as opposed to rapid rise which defaults to the largest cog close to the drive flange of the hub. There are 2 adjustment screws on the rear H and L (high) and (low). Typically if the high gear is misadjusted, you will hear some clattering sounds as you pedal at the 42t 11t combo, but that would also affect the next cog up to as well. But before you do this, have you washed and clean your cassette and chain rings fromt dirt, mud and grit after the tour? It does make a big difference when these gears are cleaned ; like crunching noises as the chain meshes with the cog or chain ring if grit and dirt are lodged in between. But if drive train are cleaned, H and L adjustments on the rear are correct and chain ring teeth are not bent or shaped like shark fins and front FD adjusted then the only possibility is chain wobble with a slightly out of true ring.

thats a much better description of it Doug, pretty much sums up the feel. As it does it on both my bikes with 11 t cogs, I really do figure its a small diameter thing going on as it is still there a smidge on the 12.

I may not know it all but I do know a lot. And just because I may not know it all doesn't mean that I know nothing.

I am not downplaying your 2x10 system...for your needs... but I am objecting to the statement that a 2x10 system is the same as a 3x10 system...or 3x9 or 3x anything. It is clearly not. All you have to do is the math to show that the 3x whatever system has more steps between the high and low gear of combination of cassette you care to use with 2 rings. You can use any system you want...I'll use what I want...but you cannot deny the facts. Sorry but you just can't.

As for new vs old cranks, the old ones aren't any better than the new ones. I've owned many, many, many cranks. I would no more go backwards to one of the old cranks then I would go backwards to friction shifting or a rigid mountain bike or a vintage touring bike. I find absolutely no problems with any new crank that I own when compared to the old stuff. I also find conspiracy theories about new equipment to be tiresome mostly because it is just not true.

As for the anger part, I tend to get testy when people call me a curmudgeon or a luddite or tell me what is best for me or imply that a double is superior for everyone else except the person telling us that a double is just best for all. I don't make arguments of a personal nature. I do not attack your...nor anyone's...character. I address your ideas and I disagree with them. But I have never called you a luddite. You, on the other hand, have not been nearly as respectful. Disagree with my ideas as much as you like. I don't care and I welcome the discussion. I will even have passionate discussions with anyone on just about any subject. But I never...no, not ever...let my passions get such a grip on me that I start name calling. Please extend me the same courtesy. It is, after all, forum rules.

Neither had I. Things are changing rapidly in the mountain bike field and, to their credit, they are moving in a direction that they haven't gone in since Suntour came out with the Alpine AG stuff back in 1981. On the other hand, this is all very high end, very new technology. I find it best, given past experience with cutting edge mountain bike stuff, to let the new tech settle a bit before jumping on it. I wouldn't mind being a test pilot for new technology if I didn't have to use my own money to do it. It's easy to get burned.

Sorry if I suggested something that may seem trivial like hitting a screw. Now offense was meant by it.

Perhaps you are more sensitive to chain noise/vibrations but I'll offer some other suggestions. We don't ride in the 11 tooth cog all that often so it doesn't wear as much as the other cogs which could make it mesh differently with the chain. There's a bit of wobble in the freehub of all bikes which could be exacerbated by cog being the furthest outboard on the freehub. A slight misalignment or a bit of cable play could make the chain not mesh quite right as I stated above. A bit of twist to the derailer hanger could also mismatch the cogs. Or it could be any combination of things.

Perhaps it would be best to do the thing that you do with a car that has a minor but nagging problem...turn up the radio

no offense taken at all.
I see what you are getting at vis a vis less wear on the 11t, but it seems to me that it does this just as much on my mtn bike even when I replaced chain and cassette the previous summer, which would seem to negate that theory. Dougs description really is the most accurate, but as you say, it may a combo of all the various things.
I really brought this up because the discussion of doubles made me think that the chances are much more that people would be riding for longer periods of time in the 12 or 11t cogs in the smaller chainring of a double. You know, to avoid going up to the larger chainring and having to downshift a bunch of gears, and from what I perceive as more chain/teeth resistance going on whilst on a 11t cog, this could mean faster chain wear (but I could be wrong here, Im just going with my gut feeling).
Just my mechanically sympatheticness side coming out.

Here's a good write up from Russ Roca and Laura from Path Less Pedaled of their mountain double (aka Touring Double) and the reasons why they went with a double rather than a triple.

I met them at the Pedal Expo in Oregon last year, incidentally shopping for a Salsa Vaya and coincidentally discussed touring doubles with him. I'm really glad he agreed with me on this and enjoyed riding it as the review suggested he liked it! Noticed they are riding 42/28, not far from 42/24 like mine.

https://pathlesspedaled.com/2012/12/s...-vs-surly-lht/

I just put the numbers in on the common gear setups we are talking about here. I’m assuming a few minor details like everyone has 700-32 wheels and that those using a 10 speed cassette are using a 11-36 that goes 11 13 15 17 19 21 24 28 32 36 and those like myself with 9 speeds are using a 12-36 that goes 12 14 16 18 21 24 28 32 36.

We have those like pacificcyclist, nun with doubles of some type with gearing such as 42, 24

Then we have cyccommute , cplager etc. with true triples 46,36,24 or 48,38,22 respectively. And others with triples of the 44,32,22 or 42,32,22 variety.

Then myself with myself with my half step + granny that’s somewhat a clone of the two methods 45,42, 24

Everyone seems to agree a 22 or 24 tooth granny is what is needed and they will give you a usable range of low gears 17 to 35 GI about without cross chaining so there is no question that small ring is needed no matter what the other ring s are.

Now the 42 tooth ring and its range assuming it can be used across the whole cassette for the 10 speed its 31 to 103 GI and for the 9 speed it’s 31 to 94 GI because of the missing 11t cog.

For the 36 tooth center ring its 27 to 88 for the 10 sp and 27 to 81 for the 9 sp.

For the 32 tooth center ring its 24 to 78 on the 10 sp and 24 to 72 for the 9 sp.

I have tried the mountain cassettes and for me it boils down to cadence and mine was too slow to support a center ring as small as 32t. It covered about 2/3 of what I wanted that one ring to do, and in my case I wanted my center ring to cover the widest amount of my normal riding kind of a RMS value of what I do. If I wanted my gearing to be split between two rings something like a 22, 26, 46 would have worked for touring. Half my average gears would be on the center ring half on the big ring. But that put my sweet spot the honey hole of GI right on the shift line. What it would have done is tighten my spacing between gears. The idea for me at that point and discussing this with nun and some of the guys here was to put my sweet spot on the center / center position thus minimizing my front shifts. Albeit was going to be a tougher shift to the granny, it would widen my spacing, and I didn’t really then have much use for the big ring. In experimenting loaded and unloaded I found the 42t was that ring for me if I was just looking for a loaded touring ring I may have selected 40 or 38. If I had went strictly touring the 38,22 that cplager has would have been very nice. But the question still is what to do with the big ring. He has 48 38 22, very similar to what I was riding around with 52 42 24 and his 48 gives him just 2 more gears higher and 4 more one and a half step gears to fill in some gaps similar to what I had. His front shift is a 10 tooth jump so it wouldn’t be too bad to shift to get those two gears but I wouldn’t see myself doing it to get a one and a half step gear unless I really was going to be in that gear a long time. If he had the 11-36 crank his top GI would be 93 GI on the center ring and he would still get 2 higher gears but most likely one would be too high. In pacificcyclist case with the 10 speed cassette he’s seeing a range of 31 to 103 with that single ring I can see why he’s happy with just that double crank. The difference of adding that extra 11t cog in there made the difference filling out the full range for him as long as (one) he doesn’t find the spacing between gears to great and (two) 31 gear inch is low enough to cover his majority of riding. In doing that I know he has a double technically speaking but to me it’s a wide range single with a granny that’s unrelated or a bail out gear. The thing I liked about a wide spaced cassette is that if I only use 6 of the cogs with my granny ring I can have a wide range of granny gears so I don’t have to shift out. When I’m nearing my largest cog on the center ring I know the way to shift down is to move over in the back to someplace close to the center. Then drop on the granny and I’m in a close gear as a starting point. If I had a 10 cog cassette starting at 11 thru 36 I might have stopped at a double. With the 9 cog cassette I was one cog short as I started with the 11-32.

Now that I have the half step I couldn’t be happier with the triple. In the old days on a 2x5 you had to move from a 42 to a 52 ring to make a half step shift. Now I only have to move from a 42 to a 45 to get half. But for me it’s also about chain line. When I get on the outside ring I have 45,12 45, 14 and 45, 16 101, 87, 76 GI that are silky smooth. On the double of 42,24 double guys they get 42,11 42,13 and 42,15 for 103, 87, 75 GI I don’t know if that chain line is as nice. I know when I had the 11-32 on the center ring to the 11 wasn’t anything as smooth as my outer ring now to the 12. That and being able to split any two gear inches in half with single shifts is well worth the extra ring.

When the OP asked about a double I wonder what rings were going to be suggested for him as a double. We all know a 42,24 works ok but I don’t see a bike shop recommending that as a new bike drive.

As strange as it sounds with my setup I don’t think I would want to go to the 10 cog cassette I think 9 and the spacing it came with worked out perfect for the double + granny.

I have one bike with 42/26 x 11/34 and another bike with 46/34 x 12/25

Many will agree with the idea of needing gearing around 20" to tour.......I don't. I am not a particularly strong cyclist and I've happily toured without a small granny gear doing some reasonable climbs in Yorkshire, the Berkshires Hills and New Hampshire. So from my own experience it's perfectly possible to tour with a smallest gear in the high 30"s.

Correction. I actually have a 9 speed 11/34 with a 46/34/20. 113 gear inches to 16 gear inches.

bud16415,

Salsa Vaya and Fargo (2 popular touring bikes) do come with a SRAM mountain double as stock. They are equipped like that and being sold in shops, so it's not a matter of the shop recommending to new bikes, but it's a matter of the shop being able to keep those bikes in stock. Last time I was at Universal Cycles in Portland, Salsa bikes go out like hotcakes. That's also where I met both Russ Roca and Laura.

Secondly, 16" to 20" GI are only needed for extreme loads and steep climbs or off-road climbs, which is why I have it as my "bail out" gear. Like nun said, I am quite contend with a 30" gear. I've even climbed a 22% hill loaded with 2 panniers weighed total 25lbs with some effort. It wasn't easy, but it wasn't impossible either. That was with my carbon bike with 30" GI as the lowest. I toured early last summer with my Masi before the conversion and the lowest then was 33" GI, so as long as you keep the load light or somewhat medium, then you're fine with a 30". Plus I'm not a particularly strong rider either.

So yes, your observation is correct and that is, I ride a ten speed bike with a 18" bail out gear on the road, which makes it like an Alfine 11 setup. People ride Rohloff which has 14 speeds. If I do off-road which I did and loved on the steel bike, I have a tendency to shift with a small reverse H pattern from 24T to 42T when needed. Beauty of Tiagra shifters with an indicator. You can do more with less.

Exactly. 38/24 crank with 11-36cog, and you're covered. BTW I'm also riding triple with 11-34. But when worn, the triple will go.