After losing time in a race fixing my front derailleur (and still having issues throughout) I'm going 1x10 for the last race I'm doing this season. I'm running a SRAM 11-36 and am planning on dropping a mid range cog (per Wolf Tooth's suggestion, probably the 17) and throwing a 42 on. My question is about what I should run up front. Right now I've got a 38/24 which gives me 93.3 gear inches (38-11) at the top and 18 at the low (24-36). My new top would be 73.6 (30-11) and the new low would be 19.3 (30-42). At 100 rpm on 29s that would go from 29.8 MPH to 23.5. Is that enough? I def have done a few races with some gravel where I locked the fork out and went into "roadie" mode (e.g take advantage of all that training at threshold). Or would the 32 up front be better? That would give me a 25.1 top speed at 100 rpm with a top end of 78.5 (32-11) and a low of 20.6 (32-42). Right now I am usually fine with running my lowest at 24-32 (second to last) and save the 36 only for when I'm really cooked. That is exactly 20.3 gear inches. Should I err on the side of caution or just try the 32? Being neurotic about it is half the fun.
1x10 Question
ezweave
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Joined
·
633 Posts
After losing time in a race fixing my front derailleur (and still having issues throughout) I'm going 1x10 for the last race I'm doing this season. I'm running a SRAM 11-36 and am planning on dropping a mid range cog (per Wolf Tooth's suggestion, probably the 17) and throwing a 42 on. My question is about what I should run up front. Right now I've got a 38/24 which gives me 93.3 gear inches (38-11) at the top and 18 at the low (24-36). My new top would be 73.6 (30-11) and the new low would be 19.3 (30-42). At 100 rpm on 29s that would go from 29.8 MPH to 23.5. Is that enough? I def have done a few races with some gravel where I locked the fork out and went into "roadie" mode (e.g take advantage of all that training at threshold). Or would the 32 up front be better? That would give me a 25.1 top speed at 100 rpm with a top end of 78.5 (32-11) and a low of 20.6 (32-42). Right now I am usually fine with running my lowest at 24-32 (second to last) and save the 36 only for when I'm really cooked. That is exactly 20.3 gear inches. Should I err on the side of caution or just try the 32? Being neurotic about it is half the fun.
Joined
·
6,543 Posts
Really it comes down to your racing style, terrain and what you are comfortable with. Remember that by compromising with the 1x10 you are losing more of your top end than your bottom end which means you will have the ability to climb just as easily but descending you will spin out sooner than with then 38/24. I am running close to the same setup (38/26) and regularly ride with a buddy that does an unmodified 1x10 (32x11/36) while I am mostly faster than him on the climbs because of my granny he does have downhill technical skill over me so he is able to descend a lot better. When doing fire road climbs or just riding on flats he spins out a lot quicker than me so he has to effectively work harder to stay up.
With all that said, it really comes down to a level of compromises and where you are willing to make the change. Look at the gearing ratios for all or your setups including comparison again your current and the addition of the 42T WT AND increasingly large front rings. For me and the amount of climbing that I have to do I am sticking with the double up front because I really do feel I use the bailout a lot. However, for me that is what it ultimately becomes; pushing hard in the 38 until my legs are having trouble moving me on the climb and then dumping to bailout (which I believe I drop from a 2.2 GR to a 1.6 GR). Geek out on the combinations as much as you like and see what you can deal with, recently I was reading on PB about some of the endure riders rides and many of them run a 1x setup, many switching out rings for the race, starting with something like a 36 up front on the practice days and then dropping to a 32 on the actual race days.
For me, before I dump the money into the WT for the extra climbing gears I will try multiple NW rings and see what works best for me (probably a 32 and 30).
With all that said, it really comes down to a level of compromises and where you are willing to make the change. Look at the gearing ratios for all or your setups including comparison again your current and the addition of the 42T WT AND increasingly large front rings. For me and the amount of climbing that I have to do I am sticking with the double up front because I really do feel I use the bailout a lot. However, for me that is what it ultimately becomes; pushing hard in the 38 until my legs are having trouble moving me on the climb and then dumping to bailout (which I believe I drop from a 2.2 GR to a 1.6 GR). Geek out on the combinations as much as you like and see what you can deal with, recently I was reading on PB about some of the endure riders rides and many of them run a 1x setup, many switching out rings for the race, starting with something like a 36 up front on the practice days and then dropping to a 32 on the actual race days.
For me, before I dump the money into the WT for the extra climbing gears I will try multiple NW rings and see what works best for me (probably a 32 and 30).
Joined
·
633 Posts
I think I'll end up buying both and catering the combo to what race I may be doing. On the road I'm a climber (142 pounds with a 298-300 w FTP) and that's helped me in the race I just did, where the 26-36 actually felt "too easy". But that race was an odd ball: 50 miles, 5300 feet of climbing, 10 miles of gravel with some pretty technical singletrack. On the gravel I was killing it pushing hard on the top end, but I was mashing. Then when my front der hosed up, I was forced to spin, unable to get into anything below the 36-17. As a result, I was doing like 110 to hit 18-19 mph whereas before (the race was two 25 mile laps) on the same sections I was doing 21-23. I have one more race in two weeks (stone temple 8 in Wyoming) which is a different format and perhaps not as technical.
Joined
·
19 Posts
I went from a 3x9 to a 1x9. Right now I'm building a 1x10 with a WT cog.
the 1x9 was a 36t in front and a 11-32. I get really annoyed when I'm on the road sprinting and run out of gears, so getting the largest chainring i could handle was the priority. Essentially I have no low end, but I chose this combo based on real riding, not whatever gear inches/ mph @ 90 or whatever. Basically I found the biggest hill on my local trails I regularly ride, and picked the biggest ring I could ride without standing.
See Sheldons calc: Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Gear Calculator
the 1x9 was a 36t in front and a 11-32. I get really annoyed when I'm on the road sprinting and run out of gears, so getting the largest chainring i could handle was the priority. Essentially I have no low end, but I chose this combo based on real riding, not whatever gear inches/ mph @ 90 or whatever. Basically I found the biggest hill on my local trails I regularly ride, and picked the biggest ring I could ride without standing.
See Sheldons calc: Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Gear Calculator
Joined
·
633 Posts
Yeah... I empathize with the top end problem. However, I often climb singletrack in the teens-twenties grade wise. Today i hit some 26% stuff and I was mashing in my 24-32 (which is basically the exactly what I can get in a 32-42) around 56, pushing watts and grabbing a 2nd on the leader board on Strava (a section of the Continental Divide Trail). I don't think I can reasonably go lower than that and still be competitive.
Joined
·
2,162 Posts
I cant imagine "racing" with less than a 36 on front. So you're going to need a 40/42 in back.
However, some climbs really demand a 28T chainring.
Compromises must be made.
That's why I went back to a 2x10.
I also had FD issues until I sorted them out but it was worth it.
However, some climbs really demand a 28T chainring.
Compromises must be made.
That's why I went back to a 2x10.
I also had FD issues until I sorted them out but it was worth it.
I went from a 26/38 double to a 30T single... I basically lost 1 to 1.5 gears on the low end and the high end. Sure, it's a compromise, but it's not that much.
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
