Maybe this is a noob question but I don't understand the advantage of 9-speeds over 8-speeds, and they seem clearly inferior to 10-speeds. The largest cassette range for an 8-speed is 11-34t and for a 9-speed is...drum roll...11-36t. Both speeds offer an 11-40t one with a derailleur extender, but still, same range, no difference there.
Now let's go to the front. From what I've read, 1x9 or 2x9 is the lowest amount of cassette speeds you can go down to for a single or double chainring; 1x8 and 2x8 don't exist at least for standard cranksets. I can understand 2x9 but 1x9 seems horrible for gear range. At least with 1x10 you can get a 10-42t cassette and have a 28% wider range than a 1x9, and maybe get some speed on straight flat areas. I also understand the concept of simplifying the front to one chainring but 11-36t in the back just seems like it sucks.
Some numbers: let's say 8-9 years ago you wanted to go from an older 3x8 to a new 1x9, for the simplicity, weight savings, less gears = stronger rider, etc. Let's do the gear inches (for a 26" at that time).
3x8, 11-34t with 22, 32, 42 = lowest gear 16.8, highest gear 99.3, a range factor of 5.9, really good. Yes heavier, yes a tad more cumbersome, but a great gear range.
1x9, 11-36t with a 24t front chainring for climbing: lowest gear 17.3, highest gear 56.7, range factor of 3.3, only 56% of the range of a 3x8, top speed cut in half. Unless your car/truck is right next to the trails you want to ride, that's going to be a long, slow ride back on the fire/gravel roads.
1x10, 1x11, 1x12 speeds have better top speeds than 1x9. Why didn't they make a wider cassette than 11-36t for a 9-speed? Are they afraid of large jumps between gears? Big deal, this isn't road biking... As they say on here What's the Point?
It kind of reminds me of the movie This is Spinal Tap, where the reporter asks the rock star guitarist why they have a volume dial that goes to 11 instead of 10. The guitarist paid someone to put a knob with 11 numbers on a 1-10 volume dial. "Because it goes to 11, man, 11 is better than 10, jeez you guys are dumb".
Now let's go to the front. From what I've read, 1x9 or 2x9 is the lowest amount of cassette speeds you can go down to for a single or double chainring; 1x8 and 2x8 don't exist at least for standard cranksets. I can understand 2x9 but 1x9 seems horrible for gear range. At least with 1x10 you can get a 10-42t cassette and have a 28% wider range than a 1x9, and maybe get some speed on straight flat areas. I also understand the concept of simplifying the front to one chainring but 11-36t in the back just seems like it sucks.
Some numbers: let's say 8-9 years ago you wanted to go from an older 3x8 to a new 1x9, for the simplicity, weight savings, less gears = stronger rider, etc. Let's do the gear inches (for a 26" at that time).
3x8, 11-34t with 22, 32, 42 = lowest gear 16.8, highest gear 99.3, a range factor of 5.9, really good. Yes heavier, yes a tad more cumbersome, but a great gear range.
1x9, 11-36t with a 24t front chainring for climbing: lowest gear 17.3, highest gear 56.7, range factor of 3.3, only 56% of the range of a 3x8, top speed cut in half. Unless your car/truck is right next to the trails you want to ride, that's going to be a long, slow ride back on the fire/gravel roads.
1x10, 1x11, 1x12 speeds have better top speeds than 1x9. Why didn't they make a wider cassette than 11-36t for a 9-speed? Are they afraid of large jumps between gears? Big deal, this isn't road biking... As they say on here What's the Point?
It kind of reminds me of the movie This is Spinal Tap, where the reporter asks the rock star guitarist why they have a volume dial that goes to 11 instead of 10. The guitarist paid someone to put a knob with 11 numbers on a 1-10 volume dial. "Because it goes to 11, man, 11 is better than 10, jeez you guys are dumb".
