Do y'all really prefer 1x for gravel?

Especially for light weight issues concerning cyclocross / touring bikes & parts.

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
ProfessorChaos
in the industry
Posts: 740
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:10 am

by ProfessorChaos

I recently aquired my second 1X Sram Force gravel bike, this one is a Specialized Sequoia, and the last one was a Diverge. I planned to put Force 22 on the Diverge, but never did. I have most of the parts here ready to install on the new bike. For me the 1x drivetrain just has too big of gaps between the gears with the 11-42 cassette. I replaced the cassette with a 11-25, and the RD with a short cage Force, and it feels noticably less drag in the drivetrain as well. Which makes since with bigger cogs having more teeth would be more contact points on the chain, and more contact would be more friction.

Don't get me wrong I love my
1x mtbs, but for road, and now gravel it's just not for me. I'll be putting a FD on my Sequoia soon as I find a 2x crankset in the proper length for my preference that fits the wider spacing needed for the wider tire clearence. Does anyone feel similarly?

by Weenie


Marin
Posts: 2662
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:48 am
Location: Vienna Austria

by Marin

No, I just converted my last road bike to 1x, with the all-road and the TT bike already with a single front ring :)

User avatar
ProfessorChaos
in the industry
Posts: 740
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:10 am

by ProfessorChaos

Marin wrote:No, I just converted my last road bike to 1x, with the all-road and the TT bike already with a single front ring :)


What cassettes are you using? I could see on a TT bike as I rarely ever use the 39t on mine. I mean I run 11-25 on all my road bikes. I like close ratios. If I never rode any hills I would be fine, but occasionaly I need a small ring. I suspect I'll need it more often on a gravel bike.

User avatar
wheelsONfire
Posts: 1784
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 8:15 am
Location: NorthEU

by wheelsONfire

I agree with you. If i would express what i think of 1*11, it's for commuter bikes or fast city bikes (Alfine 1*11 comes to mind)

I ride my gravel on most terrains except from what i feel is too much for the bike to handle.
After all, it's not a MTB.

I would never convert to 1*11.
I wonder if this grew from the fact that road bike groupsets is made for 43.5mm chainline.
A 12*142 frame, the cassette works best if chainline is wider.

When i used Shimano UL 6800 crank and 44/33 or just a Shimano 34T small chainring, the chain jumped inboards every single ride.
I tried just about everything when i simply started to let it sunk in, it's the chainline that is off.

If you think about it, no manufacturer has cared for 2*11 gravel or CX specific groupset.
It's to niche at the moment, to little money in it for them to invest.

I think this is why Sram introduced 1*11. It was the easiest solution aswell as the least costly.

To sort my issue, i decided to try what i now use.
So now i use Easton EC90 crank and axle, a custom made 110bcd spider from Kent Eriksen cycles (made for a wider chainline then standard Easton 4 bolt) and Wickwerks 44/34 chainrings.
Grinded my Di2 FD 6800 cage to better fit 46-44T chainrings diameter aswell as getting the inside of the cage, to be closer to the small chainring.
Also use Sugino MT-OX to lower the FD.
No frame has drilled holes so you can lower your FD enough to handle so small chainrings.
With the Sugino adapter, it's perfect.
The chainline is around 47mm.

IMO, no 1*11 can cover the spread you'd use for speed on tarmac, easy going gravel, really messy gravel and trails.
I even run Sram PG-1170 11-36 at my 650B wheelset and Shimano cs-hg 8000 11-34 on my 700C wheelset.

Took of Wolf tooth Roadlink and drilled a new hole for the RD tension spring. It is better shifting then with Roadlink installed and i easily use up to 36T in the rear.
I have same setting for 11-34 as with 11-34 (B-screw is taken off).

It was expensive to get the complete crankset and the MT-OX adapter. But you can have it work if you want to.
This way, you have much more linear ratio instead of the crude 1*11.
The complete crankset is 544 grams and 6800 crank with 44/33 is 691 grams.

Just wait a few years when true CX/ gravel groupsets come, then you will read how much better it is than 1*11.
Bikes:

Ax Lightness Vial EVO D
Paduano Racing Fidia
Open *UP*
https://opencycle.com/showcase/the-xplo ... eelsonfire

User avatar
cwdzoot
Shop Owner
Posts: 376
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:17 am
Location: Greenville, SC USA
Contact:

by cwdzoot

1 x for cross for sure but I don't love it on the gravel bike. This depends a lot how you use the gravel bike but I use it in many ways like a road bike and the gaps in the gears are an issued for me. I feel I get a much better gear selection from the 2 x 11 and I don't ever have issues with the front derailleur.
Blog: http://glorycycles.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/glorycycles/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Marin
Posts: 2662
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:48 am
Location: Vienna Austria

by Marin

ProfessorChaos wrote:What cassettes are you using?


Allroad: 10-42
TT bike: 11-32 for training, 11-28 for races
Road bike: 11-32 and soon 9-32 if 3T ever ships their cassettes

mrlobber
Posts: 612
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 9:36 am
Location: Where the permanent autumn is

by mrlobber

1x on TT bike (all TT's I ride are flat, plus more aero without FD = win)

1x on my cross bike (48x11-32) which I use mostly as a commuter, including some really shitty weather - from that perspective, having less mess around BB area is a definite plus.

Other than that, 2x FD setup on all road bikes - rarely using the small ring locally, but I'm quite sensitive to cadence changes, thus, a narrow gear ratio is something I would like to preserve as much as I can.

AJS914
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

cwdzoot wrote:1 x for cross for sure but I don't love it on the gravel bike. This depends a lot how you use the gravel bike but I use it in many ways like a road bike and the gaps in the gears are an issued for me. I feel I get a much better gear selection from the 2 x 11 and I don't ever have issues with the front derailleur.



This is exactly how I feel. I bought a Crux which came with Sram 1X. My wheels have a shimano cassette so I have a 11-40 cassette. The 11 is not quite a long enough gear but Shimano doesn't make a 10-40 mtb cassette.

My Crux also serves as a winter road bike so it would be better with road gears. I live in a hilly enough area so I need the full range of gears. If I lived in a flat area I could would just run a larger chainring.

But I'm just going to keep using it because it would cost hundreds of dollars to convert to 2X. Hydro levers are pricey. I could convert my cassette to XD driver and get an sram 10-42. That would help a little but will still cost a couple hundred.

If I was starting from scratch I'd go 2X.

morganb
Posts: 484
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:30 pm

by morganb

I went back to 2x after running 1x on my cross/gravel bike for two years. The extra range of gears is better for gravel and I like close ratios, and I've dropped my chain in CX and been able to put it back on by shifting with the 2x, but have to get off the bike, push the derailleur forward, and put it back onto the right teeth on a NW when it happens with a 1x.

jeanjacques
Posts: 65
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 11:01 am
Location: France

by jeanjacques

For a mix of gravel and road use, the main question is about the development range. I use 44 in front, 10-42 cassette, on the road, 44 or 46 is the smallest possible to don't stick at the bottom of the cassette. And on small path, 36 and 42 are very useful (in french but a post with lot of guys who admit this (far away from keyboard ninja): http://www.veloptimal.com/forum/viewtop ... &start=510)

44/42=1,04 and I would like to have more sometimes. A 34 / 32 it's little bit higher (1,06), a 33 at front will be better (Specialite TA) but it's round only.
So, to justify the front derailleur (and left shifter, second front ring, cable and housing), it will be better to have a wider development range with a 36 cassette. And gaps between cogs come back...

Like you, I would like sometimes have the missing cog but I can't see a good solution.

User avatar
ProfessorChaos
in the industry
Posts: 740
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:10 am

by ProfessorChaos

I'm glad I'm not alone here. I'm thinking 50/34 with 11-25 will suit me a lot better than the 42, 11-42. I just always feel like I want a gear between what I actually have available to me. I also, don't like the shape of hydro hoods, so I'm going back to cable actuated Sram Force22, but with Juin Tech F1 flat mount cable actuated hydro calipers. With any luck maybe it will be a little lighter too. I'm not holding my breath on that, but getting rid of the massive cassette seems like a win.

I am still amazed with how much less friction the 11-25 with a standard Force short cage RD felt compared to the 11-42 with the 1x specific Force RD was. I wonder if anyone has tested that. This feeling I admit was on the stand, but I always felt like 1X road setups felt a bit more friction when riding as well. It would be an interesting thing to test.

Now I'm just trying to decide on a crankset. Do I go Sram Force and call it a day, or I've been contemplating a Lightning crankset. I'm also thinking I could use the older S-Works MTB cranks with the bb386evo bb, and a Lightning compact spider would get me where I want to be.

morganb
Posts: 484
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:30 pm

by morganb

ProfessorChaos wrote:I'm glad I'm not alone here. I'm thinking 50/34 with 11-25 will suit me a lot better than the 42, 11-42. I just always feel like I want a gear between what I actually have available to me. I also, don't like the shape of hydro hoods, so I'm going back to cable actuated Sram Force22, but with Juin Tech F1 flat mount cable actuated hydro calipers. With any luck maybe it will be a little lighter too. I'm not holding my breath on that, but getting rid of the massive cassette seems like a win.

I am still amazed with how much less friction the 11-25 with a standard Force short cage RD felt compared to the 11-42 with the 1x specific Force RD was. I wonder if anyone has tested that. This feeling I admit was on the stand, but I always felt like 1X road setups felt a bit more friction when riding as well. It would be an interesting thing to test.

Now I'm just trying to decide on a crankset. Do I go Sram Force and call it a day, or I've been contemplating a Lightning crankset. I'm also thinking I could use the older S-Works MTB cranks with the bb386evo bb, and a Lightning compact spider would get me where I want to be.

Bad chain angle combined with a clutch derailleur has measurably more drag. I remember seeing the numbers before somewhere but there were a few watts difference between clutch and non derailleurs even with a straight chainline.

wrenegade
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2014 4:36 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC

by wrenegade

I'm more than happy with 1x for CX. I use 42T up front and an 11-32 in the rear. I would probably be fine with a 40T x 11-32 as I don't think I'm even in the 42x11. However, I swap wheels/chains for gravel and run an 11-42 cassette. I do admit the gaps between cogs are a pain in the ass, and I do spin out the 42x11 some times. I'm going to try an 11-36 cassette as while I have used the 42 cog, it is very sparingly, and I think I could get away with just a 36. Hopefully the gaps are much better. For a bike that races cross and trains on gravel though I don't think I could go another route. Maintenance is easier for me and I've never had an issue dropping chains (whereas I did racing cross on 2x once in a while). There are a couple drawbacks but overall 1x is a winner for me. I'm sure an 12 speed eagle type system is coming soon from SRAM. a 12 speed 10-38/40/42 cassette could both increase in the range and reduce the gaps a bit and then it might be perfect.

User avatar
ProfessorChaos
in the industry
Posts: 740
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:10 am

by ProfessorChaos

I can totally see with the dynamic nature of CX, and MTB 1X being suitable. I have no problem with the gaps as you never really settle into a nice cadence. I don't race CX, but if I did I probably would consider 1X. I'm talking specifically to gravel/adventure riding.

bm0p700f
in the industry
Posts: 3505
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 7:25 pm
Location: Glermsford, Suffolk U.K
Contact:

by bm0p700f

I love 1x11 on all bikes, race, MTB, gravel if i had one. When front mechs fail and inner rings wear out all the road bikes will go that way. Go back in time and 1x5 or 1x6 speed was quite common even though front mechs exsisted.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post