eTap + QXL?

[addictR1]

i'm currently running QXL setup 52/36 with mechanical... but moving to eTap. should i be concerned with any shift issues? or should i go back to using SRAM 52t and 36t QXL?

[TobinHatesYou]

Good luck.

[addictR1]

Good luck.

Tobin.. yea i saw a post you responded before last year.. but i hoping by now someone has got it to work?

[alcatraz]

Electronic shifting depends on chainrings doing what they are supposed to.

I wish we one day could get access to all the little parameters a derailleur uses when shifting. Timing, speed, overshift. Then chainring compatibility could be better tweaked.

If you're lucky you don't drop chains over the big ring. That's a problem with few to no solutions. Dropping on the inside can be solved by using a chaincatcher.

If you're unlucky (likely) the overshift time limit will be too short for the pickup pins to always catch the chain so you need to loosen the high limit screw to get reliable upshifts, which then leads to occasional dropped chains.

[addictR1]

So maybe best to use regular round 52T then?

How about the Rotor NoQ Qarbon in 52T? Does that play better with etap FD?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jugi]

I have two bikes in my garage setup with 1gen eTap and normal q-rings (50/34 on a 56 frame + 46/36 on a 49 frame). Both shift between the chainrings so well, honestly it is rather hard to make them drop a chain while on the road. It can be done on the workstand, just have to do all kinds of weird things like spinning at 100rpm and slowing that down rapidly to 60rpm while shifting etc.

I would assume eTap’s FD can be adjusted to work with QXL rings, but the setup will most likely be finicky and you’ll have a limited portion of the crank’s revolution which will actually be able to achieve the shift. As the FD relies on the overshift feature to move the chain, even with normal q-rings I have come accustomed to timing my shift to a certain quarter of the crank’s revolution, which always accomplishes the shift while the FD is in the overshift position.

Therefore I feel that the front shifting with eTap and q-rings is a bit delicate, although in my experience it can be adjusted to work reliably. Last week I was forced to ride a bike with round rings for quite some time. I was expecting all kinds of ergonomic problems to arise as I’m a long time oval chainring user, but surprisingly I didn’t have any issues. If one wants a robust bicycle which doesn’t have components that work a bit questionably together, I would make a critical assesment of the real need for oval chainrings with eTap. If one wants some piece of mind on their bicycle’s critical components, round rings are most likely a better solution.

[1415chris]

I used to have QXL 52/36 where derailleur (Etap) was clamped directly to the derailleur mount.
Even with plenty of fiddling overshifting was still there. Not much, it happened occasionally, but still. In my head the presence of possible overshifting was constant. Every up shift required paying attention. Certainly undesired situation.
Then I moved to, someone could say even more problematic Osymetrics. This time I decided to take a different approach. I used small spacer/wedge, one of two supplied with QXL chainrings. It's placed between derailleur clamp and frame mount.
Derailleur was slightly moved back towards the rear mech, changing the vertical cage angle too.
As a result for the last around two years, I haven't had any single overshift. Generally, front shifting is more precise and crisper now than it was with the previous setup. And in the process I also freed my mind from overshifting worries
I doubt that the chainrings on their own made such a big difference. I'm preatty sure that changing derailleur position was the key.

[Nefarious86]

Seconded. I could never make it work reliably despite having set up plenty of other bikes with etap. It will be miserable at best.

Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

[addictR1]

I used to have QXL 52/36 where derailleur (Etap) was clamped directly to the derailleur mount.
Even with plenty of fiddling overshifting was still there. Not much, it happened occasionally, but still. In my head the presence of possible overshifting was constant. Every up shift required paying attention. Certainly undesired situation.
Then I moved to, someone could say even more problematic Osymetrics. This time I decided to take a different approach. I used small spacer/wedge, one of two supplied with QXL chainrings. It's placed between derailleur clamp and frame mount.
Derailleur was slightly moved back towards the rear mech, changing the vertical cage angle too.
As a result for the last around two years, I haven't had any single overshift. Generally, front shifting is more precise and crisper now than it was with the previous setup. And in the process I also freed my mind from overshifting worries
I doubt that the chainrings on their own made such a big difference. I'm preatty sure that changing derailleur position was the key.

chris.. did you try using the same spacer/wedge when you had QXL? i use the spacer on my current 10sp setup and no drop chain issues or overshift. will try that with etap.

[1415chris]

Unfortunately not, that would give a clear answer what was the reason for a quite big improvement, chainrings or derailleur placement.
But I really doubt that the chainrings could have such a positive impact. I could come to this conclusion going from QXL to rounded chainrings, but I went in quite oposit direction changing QXL to Osymetrics with momre extreme shape.

[addictR1]

Unfortunately not, that would give a clear answer what was the reason for a quite big improvement, chainrings or derailleur placement.
But I really doubt that the chainrings could have such a positive impact. I could come to this conclusion going from QXL to rounded chainrings, but I went in quite oposit direction changing QXL to Osymetrics with momre extreme shape.

well if you got the etap FD to work with Osymetric.. then that gives me some hope with my QXL.

[addictR1]

well just a quick update. after fitting the chain on and tweaking with the b screw.. i was able to get it to run 11/32 with etap short cage and plenty more b screw thread to screw in if needed.

i'm using a parlee carbon fiber FD mount clamp and running QXL. i didn't use any additional spacers/ extension from the QXL that pushing the FD backwards.

one thing i noticed was i was able to get the FD lined up to the largest chainring on the crank and shifts fine after tweaking the upper limit screw and no chain rub on the FD cage.

however, when it's on the 34t front and 32t back, i get rubs like crazy. i checked the lower limit screw and it's not touching anything, so i dont' think any limit was put onto it.

then i tried turning the FD clamp to the left a bit, pushing the back of FD cage inwards toward the rear wheel and that remove the rubbing issue when in 34/32 combo. BUT... when i tried 52t with 11t or mid range cassettes sections, it wouldn't shift into the big chainring. if i adjust the higher limit screw to push the FD outward to push the chain onto the big chainring, it'll work, but then i'll get rubbing issues.

any thoughts?

[addictR1]

Update 2: fiddled around with it some more last night and turns out the chain was too long. In small/small combo, the chain would rub the RD jockey wheel. After removing 2 links (using the power lock), and some adjustments, now it shifts like butter.

Will take her out on an official ride and climb to see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk