Summary:
- Stick to Shimano
- Stick to 2x
- keep your stuff clean
- Wax
5 Likes
I’m not sure there was anything conclusive in there to rule out 1x over 2x.
None of the new 12s Shimano chains were tested and based on what he was saying, it sounds like you’re better off not going over-large on the front ring as you end up with more of a cross chain due to the chainring and cogs being closer, and also due to ratio requirements.
Very interesting talk about the benefit of running say a 32T chainring at the front so that you climb in the 45, or 37t cog instead of the 51t. Definitely makes sense for climbing, but also means you’re forced to spend more time in the 10-14t cogs at speed.
Kind of seems like again, unless you are strong, or have made sure your big ring is appropriately sized, 1x allows a better compromise of gearing.
1 Like
Well, we could also throw another curveball into the discussion here and discuss Campenaerts’ latest setup.
He combines a 62-tooth chainring with a smallish cassette and a Classified hub. Chainline-wise, this is a 1x setup, but he combines this with super large cogs that give you the same gear ratios. At least as far as using larger cogs goes, the science is on his side. But essentially, the usable gear range diminishes significantly. How often is Campenaerts going to be in his 62:11 = 5.63 gear, even as an overdrive gear when going downhill? Why aren’t we using standard chainrings with a 53:12 = 4.42 rather than 50:11 = 4.55? The gear range diminishes greatly, and you’d have to make much larger cassettes that wouldn’t shift as reliably anymore. For pros this tradeoff might be worthwhile, but this is not something that the other 99+ % of cyclists should emulate.
I’ve often thought school age cassettes would be a good option combined with a bit chainring.
When I did IM I had a 51T big ring, so I could spend more time in it. I’d have gone 1x if it were a thing. Back then it wasn’t super easy to get different ratios l. Compact wasn’t common place either.
One thing I do wonder, are narrow-wide chain rings less efficient than straight ones.
2 Likes
Sure, but I bet your big ring is often too big, and the little too small lol.
Luckily, everyone is free to be wrong in their own fine fashion.
Like so many of the discussions recently, the evidence is … Not clear.
2 Likes
My two cents, took my Hakka to 2x from 1x and love it. I ride in CO, and found that I’d spin out on fast group rides with a 44 up front but wouldn’t have the needed granny gear for steep and long climbs. For me, 2x just has the better gear choice most times. I loop some paved road, combined with fire road climbs/ descents.
Maybe it’s me but I’ve dropped less chains with 2x than 1x.
Keegan just won BWR Arizona with a 1x. He was using a 50 tooth chainring. Train your low cadence power and you don’t need a little ring up front. 
1 Like
I think I am the only one running a double in my gravel group. I’m rarely out of the big ring (I forget if its a 42t or 44t) but the small ring is quite useful on the occasional bump. A single doesn’t seem to hold most of my mates back on the bumps either. It might be making it a grind for some, but they folk are like that on a double on road too, so its hard to say; it certainly doesn’t hold my strong mates back.
2 Likes
But, based on my ERG training, my optimal cadence is 87. How can I ride up XYZ Hill if I don’t have a gear that lets me ride at my ftp at 87 rpm?
1 Like
This seems like an odd choice, because my understanding of a planetary gearbox is that they have more drag, so I can’t imagine that this is faster, even with a 62 chainring. I’m curious what the drag in a classified hub is though
Classified has claimed that the additional drag is pretty small, and IIRC, only when it is in what amounts to the “small” chainring setting…there is reportedly no drag when the big ring is used as the big ring.
Campanearts obviously did the math with what they claimed and figured out that the additional drag was offset by the improved drivetrain efficiency of the larger CR and improved chainline.
2 Likes
Doesn’t your optimal erg cadence change based on flywheel speed? Mine does substantially. That’s why I like training in both the big and little ring on the trainer.
I was going to rail against people who claim they drop chains all the time on SRAM, but it totally happened to me twice this weekend. 2 dropped chains on my 2x force as setup. I guess there’s a first time for everything. Whoopsie daisy.
2 Likes
Something about Sram promoting 1X because they can’t make their FDs work.
Edit: my road bike has etap 2x11 and it’s a gamble on if I’ll lose the chain when shifting to the big ring.
2 Likes
Bwhahaha. I’m totally trapped in the SRAM ecosystem now. Honestly it’s the first time in 2+ years, but I can’t figure out why since I wasn’t shifting under load.
I had three SRAM front derailers over the years, and none of them worked very well. As a result of that, I always thought that this was SRAM’s main reason for the big push for 1x. Shimano does really good front derailers though, so that need is still very well served
3 Likes
Anyone see Ganna’s set up for the TT the other day?
1x front, but interestingly not a filled in “aero” chainring.
Maybe this should be in the TT thread 
1 Like
Josh from Silca briefly addresses the aero gains / drivetrain efficiency considerations of 2x vs 1x
1 Like
This is 100% why I switched to 1x. I do like SRAM, but their FD / front rings were always really crappy. Switching out to Praxis rings (back when using 10sp) helped front shifting a lot, but probably the second time I got my chain dropped and wedged behind the chain catcher was the last time that I considered 2x on any of my bikes.
Honestly, I don’t miss 2x. I can understand the science of saving a few watts, but I prefer the simplicity, bigger tire-clearance flexibility, and extreme rarity of dropped chains vs. those few watts. (I’d also like to see more/better studies on this aspect of drivetrain efficiency.)
1x also affords the option to run the more extreme ovalized front rings (if memory serves right those are the only ones that have studies to show improved efficiency). I don’t have a strong opinion on oval rings, but am running the Alugear oval ring currently on my road bike and it’s nice. (Couldn’t say if it’s better/faster/etc., but I enjoy it.)
3 Likes
Self-selected cadence varies with wheel inertia and incline, so I would not use that number for climbs. Plus, if you are insisting on doing steep climbs at 87 rpm, you need to go beyond (1x or 2x) road gearing.
1 Like