Why does Shimano bother with 3x10 cranks? I don't understand. Isn't the whole point of 10-speed to eliminate the need for three rings?
Why 3x10?
JonathanGennick
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Joined
·
5,330 Posts
Why does Shimano bother with 3x10 cranks? I don't understand. Isn't the whole point of 10-speed to eliminate the need for three rings?
Joined
·
3,440 Posts
No "the point" the last 15-20 years have been to sell **** noone really needs, and convince people that they need it. What works good and what you need has nothing to do with what you can buy, and never has been. There is no corrolation whatsoever. You upgrade because its new. And if you don't want to upgrade they just discontinue the old parts so you are forced to upgrade whether you like it or not.
Personally I would like to hear "the point" with 10/9/8/7 speed cassettes.
Personally I would like to hear "the point" with 10/9/8/7 speed cassettes.
Joined
·
5,330 Posts
Car Bone, you are even more cynical than I am.
I happened to notice earlier that Blue Sky has the Shimano XT 3x10 cranks for sale at $150. They have the 2x10 version closer to $200. I of course want the 2x10 version at the 3x10 price. I'm guessing no one really wants the 3x10, and hence the sale. Maybe I should grab one anyway. The price is sure right.
I happened to notice earlier that Blue Sky has the Shimano XT 3x10 cranks for sale at $150. They have the 2x10 version closer to $200. I of course want the 2x10 version at the 3x10 price. I'm guessing no one really wants the 3x10, and hence the sale. Maybe I should grab one anyway. The price is sure right.
Did a 70 mile ride last weekend that was roughly half forest service or dirt roads with the balance single track and paved roads. When it wasn't single track I sure got a lot of mileage out of the 44 ring. Conversely, the 22 sure is nice to have on the rides where it gets super steep and rooty. I guess I'm saying that I actually use all 3 chain rings a good bit. I can't imagine I'm alone.
Joined
·
5,330 Posts
Ok. Makes sense. But then why not just 3x9? I guess I've just had it stuck in my head that the entire reason for 10-speed was to give more or less the same range of gearing with just two rings up front. Ah, I'm probably just wrongheaded in my thinking.
Joined
·
10,106 Posts
Thats what they tried to push to make 10s sound like its a good idea..
2x9 makes just as much sense as 2x10, or even 2x8. Theres 36t 9 speed cassettes now, so theres pretty much zero benefit to 10s. a 11-36 cassette has the same range, if its 9 or 10s it doesnt make a difference. That just means one more gear somewhere in the middle that you'll probably shift over anyway.
Maybe your trails are different than mine.. but I use maybe 4 gears on my 9s cassette. 11, 34, and a couple in the middle. I also run 2x9. I dont need any more resolution on my rear cassette, I could use less actually.
2x9 makes just as much sense as 2x10, or even 2x8. Theres 36t 9 speed cassettes now, so theres pretty much zero benefit to 10s. a 11-36 cassette has the same range, if its 9 or 10s it doesnt make a difference. That just means one more gear somewhere in the middle that you'll probably shift over anyway.
Maybe your trails are different than mine.. but I use maybe 4 gears on my 9s cassette. 11, 34, and a couple in the middle. I also run 2x9. I dont need any more resolution on my rear cassette, I could use less actually.
Joined
·
212 Posts
i have shimano 3x10 right now but personally feel it is way too much even though i did actually just use my big ring today riding down a dirtroad to get to the single track.
Joined
·
984 Posts
My first MTB was equiped with 3x7 and I thought it worked very well. I found the wider gear ratio offered by the three ring set up to come in quite useful (instant useful gear after quick deceleration). What I never wanted was 8,9, and 10 speed cassettes.
Personnally I am very grateful to singlespeeders for the advent of freewheel equiped singlespeed hubs. My 1x9 will soon become 2x6. I'm not buying 142mm wide hubs to accommodate something the big S's want to sell me.
octaginator 8 blades - YouTube
Personnally I am very grateful to singlespeeders for the advent of freewheel equiped singlespeed hubs. My 1x9 will soon become 2x6. I'm not buying 142mm wide hubs to accommodate something the big S's want to sell me.
octaginator 8 blades - YouTube
Interesting...I tend to use my 11 and 34 cogs the most too (2x9 setup), but unlike you, I actually DO use all of the cogs in between quite regularly. I find that I almost unconsciously, and frequently, shift my RD to maintain more or less the same cadence on the rolling and hilly singletrack I tend to ride. What I am interested to know is whether it would bother me to have less "resolution" on the RD, as you put it. (I like thinking of it that way--well put, One Pivot.)
I tend to think I would adapt, but I do like maintaining a fairly consistent cadence when the trails and my gear range allow. Weird, because I have never been a roadie, and I have always thought of roadies as being far more obsessed with steady cadence...but it's what I unconsciously do, so go figure. If I move to an 11-36 next season as I am thinking of doing, and a 26/38 or some similar combination up front, I guess I may find out how the slight loss of resolution affects me.
I would be interested to hear from others who have given up tight gear selection. I guess I should check out the 1x9 forum.
Steve
Joined
·
1,723 Posts
I don't know why you'd really need more than 6 or 7 on the rear in all reality. A couple good climbing gears, a couple middle gears and then 2 speed gears. You simply don't need 10 different options in back. Even if you do live somewhere with crazy climbs.
Joined
·
10,106 Posts
I cant say its wrong in any way.. With less resolution (that might just be my term, it makes sense to me though :thumbsup: ) on the cassette, it just means I have to vary my speed frequently, according to terrain. I try to maintain a pretty high, consistent cadence too, but I use speed instead of gears to keep it. I usually end up somewhere in the middle of the cassette, just by chance.
On a road bike, when running in a big group.. you'll cause crashes being all over the place with speed. You gotta follow the group and pick a gear that lets your cadence match the group speed. Mountain bikers seem to do a whole ton more accelerate/decelerate. I rode solo or in small informal groups on road too, I ditched my 12-25 10s road cassette for a nice big 11-28 8s.
Ive always figured if single speed guys can do it with one gear, I can do it too with a handfull.
Id love to setup a singlespeed hub with 6 gears on it!
I just think most mountain biking terrain is too variable, Im not sure if its really possible for 90% of mountain bikers to truly utilize 10 gears like roadies do.
Thats kind of different than how we were sold 10s though. They told us 10s "allows" us to use 2 bigger front rings, like the gear ratios were somehow different. That pitch is just pure BS, as the 11-36 9s cassettes give you the same gear range. Maybe 10s is an honest solution for some people, but its not for the reasons they're selling it.
Right on, man. I couldn't agree with you more. Give me the low gear I need for the long, punishing climbs (and those equally nasty, if short, root- and rock-filled techincal climbs), and something tall enough to hammer through the fast singletrack, and I think I can make do in between with whatever I've got. Like you said, 9-speed or 10-, it is what it is, and it's not what they sold it as.
Joined
·
2,429 Posts
ALL development of bike parts is for the race circuit....period. That area is either 2x or now 1x with the widest rear gear range you can for the typical short climbs/descents of a 20 minute lap - hence the 10sp and wide range. If you don't ride your bike in a world cup then you aren't the target 'audience'.
To fund these developments the manufacturers sell the same technology to the wider riding community, with additions for the lighter of wallet and weaker of leg. Hence the somewhat redundant nature of 3x10 (over 3x9).
To fund these developments the manufacturers sell the same technology to the wider riding community, with additions for the lighter of wallet and weaker of leg. Hence the somewhat redundant nature of 3x10 (over 3x9).
Joined
·
984 Posts
Transversely, all racing is product promotion and ultimately for the mass market consumer.
I can't agree that the manufacturers target audience is those who participate in racing, but rather those who pay attention to it, hence the gripe with the increasing cog count cassettes is that of realizing marketing, and not the needs/ wants of the typical end user, are what compel such trends.
The question becomes- does the segment whom funds these developments hold influence over the manufacturer or does marketing hold sway over the consumer? perhaps a bit of both, but I posit that it leans more so towards the later.
Joined
·
3,440 Posts
Did you guys know Campagnolo has a few groups that goes to 11? On a 10sp when you're at 10 where can you go from there? Nowhere! But campy goes to 11. Thats one more.
SRAM did a cool internal gear hub a few years ago, maybe they still sell it. With a regular cassette and 3 internal gears. So Campy 11 + Sram weirdo hub = 33 gears + 3 ring up front = 99 gears!
And with some clever engineering now that 142mm rear hubs are out in the wild you could probably fit a 12 speed cassette in the back that takes regular 4 and 5 bolt chainrings on special carriers so you can run a 53 in the back and some micro drive magic small cogs gives us a cassette of 9-53 plus the 3 internal gears in the hub. And it probably won't be long until someone clever finds out how to make a hammerschmidt take 3 rings.
Then we'll have 12x3 in the back = 36. 36*3 up front = 108. 108*2 for the hammerschmidt = 216 gears!! imagine how awesome this would be.
SRAM did a cool internal gear hub a few years ago, maybe they still sell it. With a regular cassette and 3 internal gears. So Campy 11 + Sram weirdo hub = 33 gears + 3 ring up front = 99 gears!
And with some clever engineering now that 142mm rear hubs are out in the wild you could probably fit a 12 speed cassette in the back that takes regular 4 and 5 bolt chainrings on special carriers so you can run a 53 in the back and some micro drive magic small cogs gives us a cassette of 9-53 plus the 3 internal gears in the hub. And it probably won't be long until someone clever finds out how to make a hammerschmidt take 3 rings.
Then we'll have 12x3 in the back = 36. 36*3 up front = 108. 108*2 for the hammerschmidt = 216 gears!!
imagine how awesome this would be.
Joined
·
3,440 Posts
Look at this beauty!! it probably won't be long before the enginers at Shimano figures out how to mate that Alfine 11 to a cassette doing the same as SRAM. And this is what we want. 11*12=132. 132*3=396. 396*2=792 gears
In Rohlhoff speedhub configuration=1008 gears
The future looks bright. And sane.
![Image]()
Look at this beauty
it probably won't be long before the enginers at Shimano figures out how to mate that Alfine 11 to a cassette doing the same as SRAM. And this is what we want. 11*12=132. 132*3=396. 396*2=792 gears In Rohlhoff speedhub configuration=1008 gears
The future looks bright. And sane.
It seems to me the point of 3x10 (or 7, 8 and 9) has to do with providing the most options to suit the greatest variety of riding preferences and conditions with a single solution. It may be overkill for most people—some people use the front granny gear a lot, some people never use it, some people stay in 2 and never switch out, etc. etc. etc.—but all of these people's needs are met with a single solution.
The reason for the 10 speed in specific has (partially) to do with providing new functions for people who could make use of it, such as road cyclists who might like the finer-grained options for their cadence, but then taking that and mass producing it to save costs on manufacturing. I'm sure Shimano, SRAM, etc. enjoy people wanting to buy the latest and greatest, but that's not the entire reason. It wouldn't be cost effective to produce the extremely low quantity required by the people who really really want the 10 speed, and many people don't mind and might even like the extra gears, so why not manufacturer more to save costs and sell it to more people?
The reason for the 10 speed in specific has (partially) to do with providing new functions for people who could make use of it, such as road cyclists who might like the finer-grained options for their cadence, but then taking that and mass producing it to save costs on manufacturing. I'm sure Shimano, SRAM, etc. enjoy people wanting to buy the latest and greatest, but that's not the entire reason. It wouldn't be cost effective to produce the extremely low quantity required by the people who really really want the 10 speed, and many people don't mind and might even like the extra gears, so why not manufacturer more to save costs and sell it to more people?
Joined
·
589 Posts
For my needs, the 3x10 makes a very nice setup. I'm building a CX type bike and need to ride it 15-30 miles on pavement to and from the trails and need the nice close, high speed gearing for that. Then do 5-15 miles of dirt needing the lower gears for that. Looking at my gearing, I'll have gearing steps as close as my road bike and will have gearing as low as my MTB (both are 3x7). That said, I doubt I'll use the middle ring up front all that much but those ratios do split most of those in the big ring, so will be nice to have if the situation arises.
Joined
·
18,476 Posts
I don't care very much how many cogs I happen to have on my cassette.
I like triple cranks.
I went on one of my favorite rides today. It has a 1300' climb in it, pretty much straight up a fire road. I don't mind saying it takes me a while, and I really like my 22/34 gear for it, but it rolls some, and I use a few of the low gears staying at "my" cadence and maintaining a steady effort. Sometimes even some middle ring gears.
I used 44/13 some on the long singletrack descent, and on some of the rolling fire roads around the base of the mountain.
Some quick algebra suggests I'd be happy with a 37.2t chainring. (Anyone know where I can find a fifth of a tooth? ) That's lower than most of the 2x10 cranks have, and they mostly inflict a larger granny on me. Some even have a weird BCD that won't let me set them up for me aftermarket. At least a 3x10 crank has the usual 104/64 BCD and I can set it up with whatever ratios I want.
I sometimes think I might like a more traditional double+bash setup pretty well, though - keep my granny, go up some with my middle, and get a little more clearance and a little less grabbiness.
I like triple cranks.
I went on one of my favorite rides today. It has a 1300' climb in it, pretty much straight up a fire road. I don't mind saying it takes me a while, and I really like my 22/34 gear for it, but it rolls some, and I use a few of the low gears staying at "my" cadence and maintaining a steady effort. Sometimes even some middle ring gears.
I used 44/13 some on the long singletrack descent, and on some of the rolling fire roads around the base of the mountain.
Some quick algebra suggests I'd be happy with a 37.2t chainring. (Anyone know where I can find a fifth of a tooth?
) That's lower than most of the 2x10 cranks have, and they mostly inflict a larger granny on me. Some even have a weird BCD that won't let me set them up for me aftermarket. At least a 3x10 crank has the usual 104/64 BCD and I can set it up with whatever ratios I want.I sometimes think I might like a more traditional double+bash setup pretty well, though - keep my granny, go up some with my middle, and get a little more clearance and a little less grabbiness.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
