2018 PRO thread

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

CrankAddictsRich
Posts: 1225
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:39 pm
Contact:

by CrankAddictsRich

^^^ you can't be serious, your man Froomey has been known to sneak that 32 cassette onto the back on the big days. hahaha
2016 Pactimo Brand Ambassador
http://www.Crankaddicts.cc
2017 Specialized S-Works Tarmac SL5
2015 Specialized S-Works Allez
2014 Specialized S-Works Shiv TT
2015 Specialized Venge Pro (Retired)

by Weenie


User avatar
tymon_tm
Posts: 2528
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 pm

by tymon_tm

thePrince wrote:
Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:48 pm
.how many pros are spending time in a 36/39 front ring and 11-15ish in the rear? My guess is not much.
but they do, during training for instance. should they have separate bikes for that too? more so, why would some pros swap their small ring to a 42/46t for classics like Roubaix if they barely use it - only to look the part?
thePrince wrote:
Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:48 pm
As the 1x system evolves, and we get to 14 speeds, it's not inconceivable.

Improve:
1. Chain drop w/ better narrow-wide chainring and better clutch RD
2. 14-15 speed RD
3. Lighter cassette (even at 14/15 speeds, look at an old 7 spd cassette)
4. Possible breakthrough in RD design to allow for smoother shifting across to a "climbing block"
sure, lets narrow those cogs even more, let them wear out in like 2-3k kms, same with chain - why not change it every 1k max. there's a reason why 14 or 15 speed doesn't make any sense - because a) there's no room b) even if there was room, we've got two bloody rings up front that make up for it.

when campa went with 11 there were laughs and some guy here even had an avatar with a 12sp record lever. most of us probably started with 2x8 or 2x9 and we got by, but who - after experiencing the luxury of having almost always a proper gear just a click away - would wan't to give it up and go back to the 70's standards? it's just crazy stupid
thePrince wrote:
Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:48 pm
Personally I think the 1x haters are thinking a bit inside the box rather than seeing how the racing bicycle could evolve without the need for a FD. And in the mean time, I agree it sucks for AquaBlue because the tech isn't quite there yet.
personally I think it's the other way round - people try to come up with a justification for something utterly pointless. sure, 20-30 years ago when FDs were a bit crappy, and we had 8speed cassettes max, that would make some sense - but now, with perfectly working shifting, both front and rear, giving you 22 useful gears (god knows many of use do use them all!) it just doesn't make any goddamns sense.

how a road bicycle could and should evolve? I'll say it once again - I want it to make me faster. 1x doesn't make anyone faster
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.

CallumRD1
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 2:54 pm

by CallumRD1

tymon_tm wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:36 am
...I'll say it once again - I want it to make me faster. 1x doesn't make anyone faster
That is an absurd statement. There are many scenarios where a 1x drivetrain could make you faster. If a ride could be ridden on a close ratio cassette with a single chainring, loosing a front derailleur and second chainring would both shed weight and reduce aerodynamic drag (even if inconsequentially). More so, an 11-28 cassette and 53/39 chainset (the standard for professionals) only provides 14 unique gear ratios. (53/28 is 1.89:1 and 39/21 is 1.86:1, so the only ratios easier than 53/28 are 39/23, 39/25, and 39/28.) It is entirely conceivable that we could see a 14 speed drivetrain within a decade or so which would allow you to run a 1x drivetrain with the same range and step size as a standard double setup. Making claims that having more gears would lead to only getting 2-3km/cassette and 1km/chain is ridiculous. Similar claims were made with the transition to 10 speed and 11 speed which haven't proved true. We don't know what changes will come when the engineers finish designing 14 speed drivetrains, so speculating that it will be terrible is obscenely premature.

All this being said, I wouldn't be caught dead on a 1x road drivetrain at the moment because I like neither the limited range or larger gaps between gears on wide range cassettes. And my above argument is moot for me because I am not a pro and cannot push a 39/28 up the many miles long double digit climbs that I frequent. (I ride in the mountains of Colorado every day on a 50/34 and 11-32. If I lived somewhere pan flat I certainly wouldn't be bothering with a front derailleur or a wide range cassette.)

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 6467
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

CallumRD1 wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 2:16 am
tymon_tm wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:36 am
...I'll say it once again - I want it to make me faster. 1x doesn't make anyone faster
That is an absurd statement. There are many scenarios where a 1x drivetrain could make you faster. If a ride could be ridden on a close ratio cassette with a single chainring, loosing a front derailleur and second chainring would both shed weight and reduce aerodynamic drag (even if inconsequentially). All this being said, I wouldn't be caught dead on a 1x road drivetrain at the moment because I like neither the limited range or larger gaps between gears on wide range cassettes. And my above argument is moot for me because I am not a pro and cannot push a 39/28 up the many miles long double digit climbs that I frequent. (I ride in the mountains of Colorado every day on a 50/34 and 11-32. If I lived somewhere pan flat I certainly wouldn't be bothering with a front derailleur or a wide range cassette.)
Now that is an even more absurd statement. While 1x in and of itself won't make anyone necessarily "faster", I think what @tymon_tm probably meant was that 2x is just so much more "efficient", by a large margin. So yes, in that respect it could end up resulting in being faster I suppose, but it's the greater efficiency that I would just never want to give up. And no, 14 gears wont make up for it. Even if 14 gears do get crammed back there, I'd still want two distinct ranges that a 2x up front would provide, along with close spacing at the rear. Always, well perhaps with the exception of a pan flat tt or something... then sure, just slap on a big ring with the superclose ratio cassette, but that's the ony "if" scenario in your statement above I can imagine where it would even have any merit at all.
When will it sink in that it is absolutely unequivocally not about the total "range". It is about the gear development between the cogs, on a percentage change basis that's what is very important to road riders, as well as a broad total range. Yes, we want it all. They gave it to us... why take it away now. Yes, there's some redundancy among gears for sure, but that's good. Because you have two complete "ranges" to work with when you have two rings up front, there will inherently be some overalp, but the gears within each of those ranges will also be closer together. So while there may be an equivalent gear on the "other ring" and a different cog at any given time, it's your choice as to which "range" you want to be working in while using it. That may very well be dependent on the cirumstances you're in at any given moment... in the heat of flat pace line, at the crest of hill, or getting ready to just start a big climb after cruising on the flats. The argument of "gear redundancy" with two rings is perhaps one of the lamest arguments one could make (but they have little else) against multi chainrings up front for a road racing bicycle. If anyone seriously thinks the watts they save from not having a front derailleur is in any way making a difference to their result then they should join the team of AquaBlue... because they're saving tons of watts now, aren't they. That's how they tried to sell brakes situated underneath the Bottom Bracket as well. It's a cost/benefit argument, and in the case of road racing, two chainrings are far more beneficial to the rider than the (I can't even say this with a straight face)... aero savings from lack of a front derailleur
Last edited by Calnago on Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

KWalker
Posts: 5892
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:30 pm
Location: Bay Area

by KWalker

Lelandjt wrote:
Sun Jun 17, 2018 7:11 am
KWalker wrote:
Sun Jun 17, 2018 12:51 am
Why are chain drops so common on the road, but not in pro XC or MTB events?
Because almost all MTB racers use an upper chain guide. Look at world cup bikes and you'll see a small plastic guide at the top of the chainring. My enduro and DH bikes have both upper and lower guides because I'll sometimes end a section of bumpy coasting with a 1/4 back pedal. I have 1 bike that I don't race without a guide (still with narrow/wide ring and clutch) that drops the chain sometimes.
Quickly Goolging pro bikes you're right, but quite a few don't seem to use anything. I never dropped a chain with my Eagle setup and a 32 up front. I would imagine that Aquablue could rig a simple plastic guide at this point in the year if it was that bad right? Is the clutch of the road group any different?
Don't take me too seriously. The only person that doesn't hate Froome.
Gramz
Failed Custom Bike

Wookski
Posts: 810
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:51 am

by Wookski

CrankAddictsRich wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:14 am
^^^ you can't be serious, your man Froomey has been known to sneak that 32 cassette onto the back on the big days. hahaha
He’s not my man and running an osymmetric front and 32 rear is more outrageous than being caught with a little extra ventolin in his system.

spdntrxi
Posts: 1839
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 6:11 pm

by spdntrxi

Wookski wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:34 am
CrankAddictsRich wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 12:14 am
^^^ you can't be serious, your man Froomey has been known to sneak that 32 cassette onto the back on the big days. hahaha
He’s not my man and running an osymmetric front and 32 rear is more outrageous than being caught with a little extra ventolin in his system.
yes to that.. I recently tried a 32.. it was weird feeling, almost to low. It came in handy when I had a leg cramp, but once that went away I was mostly in the 28t on the steep stuff... so I put my 28t back on.

User avatar
tymon_tm
Posts: 2528
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 pm

by tymon_tm

CallumRD1 wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 2:16 am
tymon_tm wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:36 am
...I'll say it once again - I want it to make me faster. 1x doesn't make anyone faster
loosing a front derailleur and second chainring would both shed weight and reduce aerodynamic drag
I'm sorry, don't we have a 6.8 kg limit? or have you taken those SKY statements about "fighting for 30g" too seriously?

anyway, on the subject of stupid weight gains - why don't we go back to Lance's downtube shifters, that could save us some few extra grams too?

one more brilliant idea - won't riding a nexus hub be even more aerodynamic? no rear der, no cogs, maybe that's the way to go?
CallumRD1 wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 2:16 am

It is entirely conceivable that we could see a 14 speed drivetrain within a decade or so

or so.... so let's get back to 1x when that happens, shall we? :wink:
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.

User avatar
tymon_tm
Posts: 2528
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 pm

by tymon_tm

Calnago wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:03 am

.... 2x is just so much more "efficient", by a large margin....
precisely that, I find it paramount to be able to make small speed adjustments while maintaining my cadence - both up and down the cassette
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.

romanmoser
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun May 06, 2018 8:30 pm

by romanmoser

1X has a place for some types of riding :

crits racing could be ok but you are stuck with either 52 wich could be to small or 54 wich could be to big no way to use a 53 cause Narrow wide
time trial : I see a lot of non UCI time trials pics and lot of them can use 1X and a small range cassette , heck even martin used it on a non hilly TT with a 11-32

Otherwhise 1X has his place on gravel , commuter , I wouldn't mind trying a build of the velobuild 3T strada with a 11-36 cassette

And for those who are laughing at people using a 11-32 cassette , it's actually a good idea if you are ok to not have the 16 tooth cog
Cause you can stays longer on the big chainring with a better chain line than a 11-25 for example

I am only using 11-28 , 11-30 or 11-32 cassette these days
I don't use the 32 except in some nasty cols where I should be up with only a 28 , there with the 38/32 ( = 34/28) I can spin like a MF if needed
Even pros are moving away from 11-23 cassette and stuff like that for the most part

thePrince
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2013 1:09 am

by thePrince

tymon_tm wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 1:36 am
thePrince wrote:
Sun Jun 17, 2018 9:48 pm
.how many pros are spending time in a 36/39 front ring and 11-15ish in the rear? My guess is not much.
but they do, during training for instance. should they have separate bikes for that too? more so, why would some pros swap their small ring to a 42/46t for classics like Roubaix if they barely use it - only to look the part?
Maybe leave Roubaix out of the discussion for a road bike as the pros come up with all kinds of one-offs for a handful of races that don't apply to traditional road racing.
tymon_tm wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 8:10 am
anyway, on the subject of stupid weight gains - why don't we go back to Lance's downtube shifters, that could save us some few extra grams too?
This is exactly my point...the 1x haters want both range and incremental steps along the drivetrain (and I think just about all of us what that too). But why are you tied to a front derailleur to achieve this? Before integrated brifters, everyone just used those downtube shifters. Someone who was willing to think outside the box said, hey maybe we could do this differently and acheive the same as before (ability to shift) but in an easier, more ergo, more aero way.

So would you still want a FD if your drivetrain already gave you range and step without one? Just to be old school?
CallumRD1 wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 2:16 am
[We don't know what changes will come when the engineers finish designing 14 speed drivetrains, so speculating that it will be terrible is obscenely premature.
And so we will see where 14 or 16 or whatever speed drivetrains take us. Maybe w/o a FD. Maybe with. Pushing the envelope is a good thing for the pros, and for us. In the mean time, I totally agree 1x is not suitable for pro teams racing in Europe.

User avatar
LeDuke
Posts: 1281
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:39 am
Location: Front Range, CO

by LeDuke

Can anyone explain why 2x is more “efficient”?

Seems “faster” has been retracted already. Let’s hear why “efficient” is the word of the day.

With data and citations, please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

spdntrxi
Posts: 1839
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 6:11 pm

by spdntrxi

LeDuke wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:47 pm
Can anyone explain why 2x is more “efficient”?

Seems “faster” has been retracted already. Let’s hear why “efficient” is the word of the day.

With data and citations, please.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I dont think it's been retracted... I think it what do you mean by "faster" or "efficient"...

If you must have one example of "efficient" and since this is in the "pro thread".. I dont think it's very "efficient" for team bike mechanics to swapping chains and cassettes and what not, which is what was described as happening in team AB. Besides why is the burden on 2x to prove anything.. it should be on 1x to prove it's for lack of a better term.. "better"

With the hills in my local... 1X is a non-starter... it would be a crit bike only... no fun in that.
Last edited by spdntrxi on Mon Jun 18, 2018 6:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.

maquisard
Posts: 2033
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 8:51 pm
Location: France

by maquisard

Presumably because 2x setup allows for a straighter chain line at either end of the cassette. A diagonal chain line cross loads the chain increasing driver train losses.

https://www.cyclingpowerlab.com/Drivetr ... iency.aspx

romanmoser
Posts: 119
Joined: Sun May 06, 2018 8:30 pm

by romanmoser

https://ride.diamondback.com/friction-p ... rivetrains

Frictions on 1X with clutch compared to 2X without clutch

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post