On Saturday, February 15, 2020 at 8:07:22 PM UTC-5, Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/14/2020 12:37 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 8:50:01 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/14/2020 5:04 AM, wrote:
On Friday, February 14, 2020 at 5:52:08 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 5:35:48 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
We usually advise 'follow manufacturer's directions' but in
this case a clever exception shows some promise:

https://bikerumor.com/2020/02/07/how...ullet-gearing/

So that's instead of just having two chainrings? Um... why?

- Frank Krygowski

Why? To get rid of the FD and front shifter and avoiding to shift
front and back in critical race situations. Some people think they can benefit from it.

Oh. Now I remember! If some people _think_ they can benefit from it,
we're not allowed to discuss what anyone else may think.

IOW, comparison of real benefits and detriments is strongly discouraged
here.

The linked article is about a kludge accomplished by someone who
actually wanted 1X on his clearly custom bike. 1X has the benefit of
being a rock-solid set-up in rough terrain. You should read about it.
https://tinyurl.com/v3un986

I tried to read that, but all I got was a photograph.

You constantly bad-mouth basically anything you don't own and with which
you have zero experience.

I have test ridden a couple 1x bikes, but not for long. The longest was
when the president of the local mountain bike club met me in our forest
preserve to look at possible trail work projects. We traded bikes for
maybe half an hour on the back trails. His bike (I don't recall the
brand) was super light, rigid, with probably 4" tires, disc brakes and
1x transmission.

It shifted very nicely, but when I asked about it, all he said was "I
never have to worry about a front shift." OK, for the twisty, lumpy
single track trails in this little forest I could see that being nice.
(The only time I ever broke a chain was in there, trying to hit the
granny gear for a quick super-steep rise.)

But otherwise, ISTM front shifting is a big benefit. Look ahead, see
"this is going to be steep" and execute one front shift that gives you a
whole range of low gears, with the lowest being lower than a 1x could
get. (I think my lowest is a 24 - 34 and it can be shifted with very
ordinary derailleurs.)

You certainly loose potential range, but there isn’t a problem getting to
low gears with 1X systems due to the fact that modern cassettes are 10-50
so the modern equivalent of my MTB which is 2x10 has broadly the same range
as the modern 1X12 the modern is just slightly lower geared, at both ends..

But having low gears or high gears isn’t a problem though with older
systems you have to make a choice, as my commute bike with 1X9.

The main reason wasn’t chain slap etc, or throwing but frame/suspension
design at least for MTB for gravel bikes etc I’m less convinced.

So you're saying having a suspended rear wheel makes it trickier to provide good
front shifting? If so, I can envision that as a possibility. But I'd love to see
an article on the mechanical specifics.

The 1x bike I test rode the longest (admittedly, not very long) was rigid front
and rear, with something like 4" tires providing all the "suspension." All the
owner told me was "I don't have to worry about front shifts."

- Frank Krygowski