If I had a track bike and a track to ride I'd ring a fixed gear or singlespeed if I wanted to be blasphemous about it. Otherwise 2x and 3x. I always liked to joke that those who choose a 1x always believe they're "right" , all-the-time ! Ahahahahaha. C'mon, you gotta laugh at the hilarity of all this, as if 1x, 2x or 3x are in competition against each other. I was recently called a luddite(I had to look that one up as to the specific reference) for favoring steel frames, rim brakes, friction shifting and multiple chainrings. As if going to a carbon frame, discs, and a battery operated shifting 1x system was somehow "progress" and that what I rode was so archaic that it was for children and primates. *Pass the bananas then, eh ?* It was unfathomable that anyone could possibly discern what was proper for themselves regardless of whatever the latest fad in cycling is. Have you noticed how the trends come and go like the wind, always changing ? While the basic stuff we ride just endures. It doesn't *need* changing or upgrading and it's not broken or flawed, and that's the point. I feel the same way about gasoline autos, but that's another story, albeit the theme is the same.
My double is a 46/36 and a 13-32 7sp FW. I love that I can ride six cogs in the rear with the 46t ring. I've said it a million times but I love riding the larger rings, albeit now it's 46t rather than 50t or 52t. I'd rather have the usable gears in my power range than having a few very large gears used once in great while. I can spin out of the 46t quickly downhill, so I tuck and enjoy the flight rather than concerning myself with pedaling. I have plenty of other opportunities to blow my lungs up up on the uphills :) My Bomba has a 44/36/24 Andel triple using only the seven 14-32 cogs of a 9sp 12-36. Even with a less than great Surly stainless 44t big ring with no beveling, I have no issues with shifting the FD. IDK why some have problems with them, likely for the same reasons some don't. (((:shrugs:))) With a double or triple it's so easy to criss cross your gear choices quickly as you use both hands. With fewer cogs, I like seven, it's heaven ! On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 2:37:25 PM UTC-5 Joe Bernard wrote: > I might agree that a triple is unnecessary unless you really like pedaling > downhill, but I'm off the 1x bandwagon. My Riv Custom (parts currently > transferred to a Clem) was set up with a 34 x 11-50 11-speed, SRAM Rival 1 > rear mech. It's fine for most of the roads around here but there's a couple > VERY steep sections that are on loops I ride all the time and I'd rather > stay on the bike and spin vs. walking. Plus the range is simply too high > for the also-steep trails I've been exploring lately. So now I've added a > 26t granny ring and fiddled with the B-screw enough to make the derailleur > work with it (it's not supposed to). I'm #TeamDouble! > > On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:26:11 AM UTC-8 Jim Whorton wrote: > >> I read that same VO post and decided it made a fine case for 1x. If you >> are spending most of your time in the middle ring of a triple, why ride a >> triple? I get it for racing, or keeping up with a fast group, but I don't >> do those things. >> >> My most recently acquired (old) bike has a triple, though, and I have >> resisted modifying it. Still waiting to have my mind changed. >> >> Jim in Rochester >> >> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 1:44:06 PM UTC-5 captaincon...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> I dissent. Front derailers are unnecessarily complicated to setup, and >>> so are triple chainrings, especially on XD2s. I have 1X 10 one two bikes, >>> and love it, and I just specced a 1X 11 with a Deore 5100 derailer and >>> 11-51 cassette for my BMC Monstercross. The whole drivetrain cost less >>> than a nice triple crankset, it's all lighter too. Check out Analog Cycles >>> for inspiration. >>> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:45:17 AM UTC-6 Johnny Alien wrote: >>> >>>> For years Grant/Rivendell argued against lots of gears in the rear >>>> because people didn't need to shift that much. The message was to push >>>> through if its too hard or even get off and push the bike up the hill. Now >>>> its shifting to a new argument...why not have those extra gears available. >>>> Honestly its all marketing to me. I like the simplicity of a 1x because I >>>> get the bulk of the gears I need with less maintenance. For me (personally >>>> mind you) the front derailer has always been the sketchiest part of the >>>> setup. Dropping chains, chain rub....its all a balancing act. I am happy >>>> to >>>> have that all go away with a sacrifice of the granny gear. I see what VO >>>> is >>>> saying and I think its probably a practical opinion but for me?? 1x just >>>> works. >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 12:33:52 PM UTC-5 campyo...@me.com >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have a triple on just one bike (Soma Saga). My main problem is that >>>>> when I’m in the smallest chainring I am moving so slowly that it’s hard >>>>> to >>>>> stay upright. On the very steep inclines that necessitate the small cog, >>>>> I >>>>> find it easier to just get off and walk the bike up the hill (something >>>>> we >>>>> used to call a “24-inch gear”). >>>>> >>>>> --Eric Norris >>>>> campyo...@me.com >>>>> Insta: @CampyOnlyGuy >>>>> YouTube: YouTube.com/CampyOnlyGuy >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 9, 2024, at 9:20 AM, Ron Mc <bulld...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I've been on half-step triples for over a decade, and never looked >>>>> back. >>>>> Many 30-mi rides never see a rear shift. >>>>> >>>>> <Capture.JPG> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, January 9, 2024 at 11:00:57 AM UTC-6 Steven Sweedler wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> For several years all my bikes have had triples, usually 46-32-20 on >>>>>> XT 737 cranks. For this current trip I took off the big ring because I >>>>>> rarely use it when touring with Cindy, or any of my solo riding, just >>>>>> when >>>>>> riding with the guys chasing them down hills. It does look a little >>>>>> ridiculous, with the front der way up in the air but so far its working >>>>>> out >>>>>> just fine. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Steven Sweedler >>>>>> Plymouth, New Hampshire >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 4:47 PM Patrick Moore <bert...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> VO makes a good case for triples: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://mailchi.mp/velo-orange.com/triplesaregreatchangemymind?e=9c5efe5ba1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Simplicity and Effectiveness* While 1x systems boast simplicity, >>>>>>> the emphasis on constant shifting may be overstated. Many riders find >>>>>>> themselves primarily using the middle ring, operating as a 1x system >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> added flexibility to adapt to different terrain. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The point that triples are usually used as 1Xs with low and high >>>>>>> ranges available is the key, I think. I know that, even with 10 or 11 >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> back, I'd not want a 1X, and even a 1X + granny (ie, very wide range >>>>>>> subcompact 2X) would leave me wanting easy-shifting gears for steep >>>>>>> rolling >>>>>>> offroad terrain (which I don't ride anymore), as I found when I swapped >>>>>>> out >>>>>>> a 3X7 for a 2X9 on my erstwhile Fargo. For road use including heavy >>>>>>> loads >>>>>>> and steep hills the 2X9 was easier to use and provided sufficient range >>>>>>> with close cruising steps, but I did miss the middle-ring range between >>>>>>> about 65" and 35" which comes with the middle ring on a 46/36/24 triple. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patrick Moore >>>>>>> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> Executive resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, letters, and other >>>>>>> writing services >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> *When thou didst not, savage, k**now thine own meaning,* >>>>>>> *But wouldst gabble like a** thing most brutish,* >>>>>>> *I endowed thy purposes w**ith words that made them known.* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgsXL-XZ%2BiZzsBoQQ7Ne5ejQzbUJu97Pj3rJ8Cno4M-YVg%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgsXL-XZ%2BiZzsBoQQ7Ne5ejQzbUJu97Pj3rJ8Cno4M-YVg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8a0db1ed-36ab-49f7-acbb-86b050cd5e85n%40googlegroups.com >>>>> >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8a0db1ed-36ab-49f7-acbb-86b050cd5e85n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> <Capture.JPG> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/afa65406-330e-4c09-af74-158869c2695dn%40googlegroups.com.
