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.)

Meanwhile, people who have owned doubles, triples, 1X, IGH, etc., etc. make reasoned decisions to run -- or not run -- 1X. They're not crazy. They're not deceived. Guys who are kludging expensive SRAM systems obviously believe in the superiority of 1X, just like you believe in the superiority of triple cranks and cantis -- crap I dumped long ago and never looked back.

But can't we discuss? When is 1x more sensible than 2x? Or 3x? When is
it not? What are the advantages and disadvantages?


--
- Frank Krygowski