Author Topic: 1X, 2X, or 3X  (Read 2320 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline froze

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #30 on: September 24, 2021, 09:26:40 pm »
I must be unusual.  I have had several shimano front deraileurs fail over the years.  Not a frequent thing or a big worry, but it hasn't been all that rare.

I don't think anyone would choose 1X for weight savings in a touring application, but maybe for simplicity.  It depends.  If the range is enough and the gaps between gears are close enough why add another one or two rings and a deraileur.  For me the range and spacing on some 1X setups seems adequate.  For some it wouldn't be.  Folks should choose accordingly.

I've never had any derailleur, front or rear, fail except one rear derailleur which was a Simplex with the black plastic body, what a piece of crap that thing was.  I have a front derailleur with over 150,000 miles on it without one repair or failure, but that is a Suntour Superbe Pro derailleur which is part of a Suntour Superbe group, and the whole group has the same mileage, and none of the parts have failed.

Geez there are crappy Schwinn Varsity, Continental, Traveller, Suburban, and Collegiate bikes out there with their original front derailleurs working just fine, I remember those bikes, the components didn't work all that well but they held up as their testament that lives on today proves

Offline staehpj1

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #31 on: September 25, 2021, 07:48:45 am »
In a review of a bicycle in Bicycling Magazine, the reviewer knocked the "added heft" of the triple crank .
Yeah, a tourist generally wouldn't be worried about it or at least most wouldn't care much, but some other riders would.  Performance oriented riders, especially if they may be racers, may well care about the weight of 2 rings, a derailleur, a cable, and a shifter.

On the other hand.  The only way I got my packing list from 50+ pounds down to 8-12 pounds was to watch every ounce and to trim ounces sometines one at at time.  I am less aggressive about trimming weight on the bike mostly because I am a cheapskate and ride what I own, but if buying or building up a new bike, given the level of obscession and amount of money folks spend I can see someone caring about a few ounces.

I do wonder about your 2 ounce figure.  Afterall we are talking about two rings, a derailleur, a shifter (or the shifting portion of a brifter), and a cable.

Offline staehpj1

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #32 on: September 25, 2021, 08:01:16 am »
I must be unusual.  I have had several shimano front deraileurs fail over the years.  Not a frequent thing or a big worry, but it hasn't been all that rare.

I don't think anyone would choose 1X for weight savings in a touring application, but maybe for simplicity.  It depends.  If the range is enough and the gaps between gears are close enough why add another one or two rings and a deraileur.  For me the range and spacing on some 1X setups seems adequate.  For some it wouldn't be.  Folks should choose accordingly.

I've never had any derailleur, front or rear, fail except one rear derailleur which was a Simplex with the black plastic body, what a piece of crap that thing was.  I have a front derailleur with over 150,000 miles on it without one repair or failure, but that is a Suntour Superbe Pro derailleur which is part of a Suntour Superbe group, and the whole group has the same mileage, and none of the parts have failed.

Geez there are crappy Schwinn Varsity, Continental, Traveller, Suburban, and Collegiate bikes out there with their original front derailleurs working just fine, I remember those bikes, the components didn't work all that well but they held up as their testament that lives on today proves
Interestingly enough, the ones that I have that failed were all fairly "nice" models.  The cheap stuff I had way back in the day of junky bikes never failed.  I can't quite picture exactly where they broke, but they were similar failures.  I think it was the arm the cable attached to.  It seemed like Shimano tried to use less material, to keep weight down I guess, and it was a weak point.  I think one was a 105, one may have been a Dura Ace, and one may have been a Deore or Deore XT, but I may be wrong on the second two since it has been a long time.

Offline HikeBikeCook

  • World Traveler
  • *****
  • Posts: 337
  • Touring for over 50 years and still learning
Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #33 on: September 25, 2021, 08:16:18 am »
When I was chasing weight on my Litespeed a fellow rider was amazed at what I had just spent to save an ounce. He looked over and said; "You fat F#$*, why don't you just skip a lunch"  :)

It is after all total weight, bike and rider, that you have to drag up that mountain.
Surly Disc Trucker, Lightspeed Classic, Scott Scale, Klein Mantra Comp. First touring bike Peugeot U08 - 1966

Offline staehpj1

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #34 on: September 25, 2021, 08:48:01 am »
It is after all total weight, bike and rider, that you have to drag up that mountain.
Sure, but, you can change gear weight instantly, painlessly, and permanently with not much committment, body weight not so much.  So why not grab that low hanging fruit?  Also I have found that a lightly loaded bike is a joy to ride regardless of my current body weight.

Body weight is governed by many choices that have nothing to do with riding and we make those choices independent of our riding.  Should we maintain good general fitness? Of course.  Does success or failure at that negate efforts at maintaining low gear weight?  I don't think so.  I have started tours at different fitness levels and if anything when I am out of shape I appreciate my UL packing style more.

Over the course of a long tour my fitness level improves and I lose weight, but start to finish a light load is a joy.  I honestly don't think I notice the 10 pounds or so of body weight I lose, but I sure notice 10 pounds of food and water if I have to carry extra for a hilly section without resupply.

Offline HikeBikeCook

  • World Traveler
  • *****
  • Posts: 337
  • Touring for over 50 years and still learning
Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #35 on: September 25, 2021, 09:09:22 am »
I agree, but there gets to be a point where you have your gear weight down to what you either want, need, or can afford. After that accept your gear and start training. Buying lighter gear is not a substitute for training, although it sure can be fun and rewarding. I think getting packed weight down for some of us is like training - can you ride that hill faster versus can you get your packed weight a pound lighter. And sometimes, due to weather or schedule, your first weeks of your ride have to be your training.

Dumping bike gearing to save weight should be like dumping camping gear to save weight, Do you use it, do you need it, do you want it. If you never use your triple then dump it, but if you rely on it then the extra 1/4 pound is essential.  I typically don't need my first aid kit, but want it for peace of mind. Do you really need to carry that backup pack of Ramen just in case? You can go without food for days, and you could ride without lower gearing, but would you want to? For some people the answer is yes.
Surly Disc Trucker, Lightspeed Classic, Scott Scale, Klein Mantra Comp. First touring bike Peugeot U08 - 1966

Offline staehpj1

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #36 on: September 25, 2021, 10:13:43 am »
Dumping bike gearing to save weight should be like dumping camping gear to save weight, Do you use it, do you need it, do you want it. If you never use your triple then dump it, but if you rely on it then the extra 1/4 pound is essential.
Yeah, the thing is that with the super wide range clusters available (like 11-50) so I don't find them necessarily 1X limiting in range so you may or may not actually be giving up anything.  On the contrary, some might actually use one to get a wider range than they currently have.  I know that I'd have a substantially wider range with some 1X setups than I did with the double I used on the ST.  There may be a little bigger jumps between some gears which I don't mind.  Some riders may.  For me the possible range of something like 20-94 gear inches is pretty close to ideal (a good bit lower than I had on the ST).  Someone who wants/needs a lower granny would have to decide if they could live with a little lower high gear.  Something like a 17.5-79.5 or 18.6-84.4 gear inches look like possible options that may or may not be acceptable.

A 1X setup certainly won't be the answer for everyone, but I can see it as a good answer for some.

Offline froze

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #37 on: September 25, 2021, 10:25:03 am »
I must be unusual.  I have had several shimano front deraileurs fail over the years.  Not a frequent thing or a big worry, but it hasn't been all that rare.

I don't think anyone would choose 1X for weight savings in a touring application, but maybe for simplicity.  It depends.  If the range is enough and the gaps between gears are close enough why add another one or two rings and a deraileur.  For me the range and spacing on some 1X setups seems adequate.  For some it wouldn't be.  Folks should choose accordingly.

I've never had any derailleur, front or rear, fail except one rear derailleur which was a Simplex with the black plastic body, what a piece of crap that thing was.  I have a front derailleur with over 150,000 miles on it without one repair or failure, but that is a Suntour Superbe Pro derailleur which is part of a Suntour Superbe group, and the whole group has the same mileage, and none of the parts have failed.

Geez there are crappy Schwinn Varsity, Continental, Traveller, Suburban, and Collegiate bikes out there with their original front derailleurs working just fine, I remember those bikes, the components didn't work all that well but they held up as their testament that lives on today proves
Interestingly enough, the ones that I have that failed were all fairly "nice" models.  The cheap stuff I had way back in the day of junky bikes never failed.  I can't quite picture exactly where they broke, but they were similar failures.  I think it was the arm the cable attached to.  It seemed like Shimano tried to use less material, to keep weight down I guess, and it was a weak point.  I think one was a 105, one may have been a Dura Ace, and one may have been a Deore or Deore XT, but I may be wrong on the second two since it has been a long time.

Not sure how old your 105 and Deore were, but I have a 105 from 2013 and a Deore from last year, so far so good.  I've always have in the back of my mind that if something fails I would upgrade it one, maybe two steps up but not to DA, DA doesn't last as long as the lower levels because it was intended for racing and not for long term street riding, so they made it as light as they dared. 

I haven't heard of any 105's failing, but I don't ask everyone in the world about it!  LOL!! maybe some that read this can respond if they had 105 fail, but I know in a internet search I came up mostly blank...there was one guy who's 105 front derail broke at the tabs that hold the side plates, both the front tab and the rear tap broke at the same time, it appeared in the photo to be poor casting, but his bike was so dirty I couldn't really be sure if it was poor casting or rust, but that was the only incident I could find on the internet!  Obviously it's not a common problem.

I could not find one incident concerning either Deore or XT breaking.

You could try finding incidences and let us know what you found. 

How did your derailleurs fail?

Offline froze

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #38 on: September 25, 2021, 10:35:58 am »
I agree, but there gets to be a point where you have your gear weight down to what you either want, need, or can afford. After that accept your gear and start training. Buying lighter gear is not a substitute for training, although it sure can be fun and rewarding. I think getting packed weight down for some of us is like training - can you ride that hill faster versus can you get your packed weight a pound lighter. And sometimes, due to weather or schedule, your first weeks of your ride have to be your training.

Dumping bike gearing to save weight should be like dumping camping gear to save weight, Do you use it, do you need it, do you want it. If you never use your triple then dump it, but if you rely on it then the extra 1/4 pound is essential.  I typically don't need my first aid kit, but want it for peace of mind. Do you really need to carry that backup pack of Ramen just in case? You can go without food for days, and you could ride without lower gearing, but would you want to? For some people the answer is yes.

That is good advice.  I carry a first aid kit when touring/camping and just bandaids when not, but really any first kit you can carry is small and only designed for minor stuff, even moderate injury would be untreatable with those kits.  I made my own kit, it was cheaper than buying a kit, I used a clam shell water resistant case like those kits come with, and just used off the shelf stuff to fill it with.  Then I also carry superglue, if necessary I can close a deeper wound that a bandaid would not be able to contain with the glue since stitching would be out of the question on the road; then I would ride or hitchhike to a medical clinic some place and get it done right.

Don't laugh about the superglue, it does work.  I had a gash just under my eyebrow and the PA used superglue to close it up, she did such a good job it left no scar.  I asked her what that stuff was she was smearing on the cut, and she said it was nothing but superglue renamed for the medical field.

Offline staehpj1

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #39 on: September 25, 2021, 12:43:35 pm »
Not sure how old your 105 and Deore were, but I have a 105 from 2013 and a Deore from last year, so far so good.
Okay so I looked at my old parts stash since I often keep even broken stuff.  I was hoping I'd find something to refresh my memory.  Sadly I didn't find any broken derailleurs.  They would have been from the 80s or 90s.  The 105 would have been from my 1990 Cannondale Crit bike.  It has a newr model derailleur on it at present.  I did find one similar to the original in my used parts bin.  While this one is fine...  Looking at it I think I recall the point of failure being the nub where the spring is hooked on an arm.  The a bit of the casting cracked and the portion with the nub came off as I recall.  My memory is pretty hazy so I may well be wrong about models or vintages of other failures.  I say they are most likely to be Deore or Deore XT only because I owned a bunch of different mountain bikes in those years and that is what they were equipped with.  I don't specifically remember since I thrashed a lot of stuff hammering rough singletrack and that was quite a while ago.  I might even be wrong about the number, but it was definitely more than one including the 105.

Offline dkoloko

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #40 on: September 25, 2021, 01:26:56 pm »
For me 2 oz.  total difference. Switched back and forth between 2x and 3x and did not change anything except add or remove a third chainwheel.

Offline staehpj1

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #41 on: September 25, 2021, 01:37:03 pm »
For me 2 oz.  total difference. Switched back and forth between 2x and 3x and did not change anything except add or remove a third chainwheel.
Ah, okay that makes sense.  The difference is probably greater for going to 1X since you lose 2 rings, a derailleur, a cable and a shifter.  Also possibly a slighly lighter crank arm.  OTOH, probably some bigger cogs on the back to offset some of that difference.  In any case it still isn't a huge difference especialy to most tourists.

Offline Pat Lamb

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #42 on: September 27, 2021, 10:38:45 am »
Not sure how old your 105 and Deore were, but I have a 105 from 2013 and a Deore from last year, so far so good.

Oh, so pretty new.

Quote
Obviously it's not a common problem.

I could not find one incident concerning either Deore or XT breaking.

How did your derailleurs fail?

Interestingly enough, I had a Deore break last summer after about 30,000 miles.  Old or only 5 years' full-time usage?

The lead mechanic at the bike shop, when I described the symptoms, hollered over, "You need a new front derailer.  The spring rusted out.  That happens a lot, and your symptoms are what happens when it does."  He was right!

Offline froze

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #43 on: September 27, 2021, 09:05:04 pm »
Not sure how old your 105 and Deore were, but I have a 105 from 2013 and a Deore from last year, so far so good.

Oh, so pretty new.

Quote
Obviously it's not a common problem.

I could not find one incident concerning either Deore or XT breaking.

How did your derailleurs fail?

Interestingly enough, I had a Deore break last summer after about 30,000 miles.  Old or only 5 years' full-time usage?

The lead mechanic at the bike shop, when I described the symptoms, hollered over, "You need a new front derailer.  The spring rusted out.  That happens a lot, and your symptoms are what happens when it does."  He was right!

Obviously your mechanic never heard of WD40.

Offline OHRider

Re: 1X, 2X, or 3X
« Reply #44 on: September 28, 2021, 04:35:57 pm »
I had a 3X for years but my gravel (touring bike) and road bike both have compact doubles now.  I switched the rear cassette out to an 11x36. Mated with the 30 tooth front crank this climbs well on steep grades, even loaded.  The 2X tends to be much easier to keep from rubbing than the 3x was and I can't see going back with the wide ranges available with 2X.

I just bought a couple of new Specialized Robaix Pro 2BR 700x30/32 tires to replace the existing ones for a Southern Tier ride (maps 1 and 2).  These could be set up tubeless but I'm going to run them with tubes.  I've changed about uncounted flats over the years and am content with something I have full confidence in for a tour.  Plus, from what I hear, you can't get them reseated without a good air source.  I'll probably set my gravel wheels up with tubeless next time I have to get new tires but these have a lot of miles left on them.