Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

61 - 80 of 87 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,672 Posts
I managed to get some second hand parts or something. And the guy is coming over to my house to fit them. XT bits yay!
Those parts will get out of calibration just like the parts you have. But you will probably save a lot of weight.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
35,025 Posts
speedygz, I think it's funny that, without knowing me at all, you took a roundhouse swipe at me for being "someone who obviously has no clue as to how set up a simple, straightforward device such as a front derailleur."

I mean, there were ways to make it work, like using SRAMs micro-adjust FD shifter. That was a pretty ingenious solution to the inherent issue of FDs, but SRAMs GS in the early 3-ring days was pretty crappy. 2x also helped, but of course, you "lost out" on range, blah blah blah.

Remember riding in the 2nd ring and then having to "let up" on the pedaling so it would "hopefully" shift down to the granny? I mean, you could run it so it would shift down easier, but then it would drop the chain half the time and your knee would bang into the handlebar. It was ****. It varied from bike to bike and setup to setup in terms of degrees of working, but there was enough variance and poor performance to make it obvious that it was far from optimal.

Then there was the cluster**** of aftermarket rings that had varying degrees of shifting performance. Hell, remember all the little pins and ridges that the 2nd ring had to have just to get the chain back up on to it?

I think part of this (people thinking they need 2x and 3x) goes back to people thinking they need massive big front rings and massive "high end" gearing, because they think it makes them go faster. Except riders are riding faster all over, up and down, without 52t front rings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
I mean, there were ways to make it work, like using SRAMs micro-adjust FD shifter.

Or, simply use compatible components, set up correctly.

It varied from bike to bike and setup to setup in terms of degrees of working, but there was enough variance and poor performance to make it obvious that it was far from optimal.

And yet Shimano, right up to today, still makes 2x drivetrains. If it were even 1/2 as bad as the haters try & make it out to be, it would have disappeared years ago.


I think part of this (people thinking they need 2x and 3x) goes back to people thinking they need massive big front rings and massive "high end" gearing, because they think it makes them go faster. Except riders are riding faster all over, up and down, without 52t front rings.
Lol lol lol. You mock 50 tooth chainrings, yet are quite happy to hang dinner plate sized cassettes with sprockets the same size on your rear wheel, so you can now go slow enough. With the resulting dangly bits needed to make it all work, hanging out in the breeze, waiting to get damaged. Strong in the legs, weak in the head springs to mind
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
810 Posts
Lol lol lol. You mock 50 tooth chainrings, yet are quite happy to hang dinner plate sized cassettes with sprockets the same size on your rear wheel, so you can now go slow enough. With the resulting dangly bits needed to make it all work, hanging out in the breeze, waiting to get damaged. Strong in the legs, weak in the head springs to mind
To be fair, some triples had very low ratios too, they just achieved it with small chainrings. A 3x10 with a 40-30-22T crankset and an 11-36 cassette has a 0.61 low gear, which is the same as 32-52. :) Rear derailleur cages were just as long or longer on a lot of triples, since cage length is related to capacity, not max cog size (but obviously the RD is lower to the ground when it's on those bigger cogs).
Let's not forget wheel size either. Even if you had a slightly higher low gear than 22-36 on your triple, you might have been riding smaller, 26" wheels (smaller wheel=less distance per revolution, aka slower speed with the same gear ratio and cadence).
Some people mock 50-52T cassettes, but we've had low gear ratios like that ages ago. We lost those low gears when 1x11 first came along, and then we gained them back with 42T+ cassettes.

When it comes to high gears, MTBs simply became more focused and more capable off road. A MTB in the 90s might have had a 3x8 with something like a 48x12 high gear, but it was probably fully rigid with 1.9 tyres that had barely any tread, so it was decent on pavement too.

But IMO over gearing bikes has always been a trend. MTBs don't really do it anymore but it's still present elsewhere. (Although it's changing, even road bikes have been moving to wider range cassettes for the past few years. I remember that a few years ago it was a big deal that some pro road team was using 11-32 Ultegra cassettes at some big race instead of Dura Ace, because DA topped out at 11-28 or something. :lol:)
Just look at how many average Joes actually use 50-11 on their road bikes (not talking about coasting down a big hill and barely pedaling), or how many people riding hybrids/trekkings use 48-11 on their triples... When I worked on older road bikes that had something like a 52/42 or 52/39 etc., the big ring was usually in good condition, and the small ring was worn out almost always. :lol:
A lot of people want those high gears because they think they're going to go that fast, but in reality they rarely do (if ever).
I dabble in some gravel stuff too. Some people coming from the road side don't want a gravel bike with GRX and a 46/30 crankset, they want a 50/34 road compact, because they think they're going to go as fast with 40mm knobbies as they do on their road bike with 25mm slicks. They buy a gravel bike with a 50/34, and after a few months go by you see a "how to get lower gearing on my gravel bike" thread pop up... :lol:
 

·
Out spokin'
In cog? Neato!
Joined
·
11,487 Posts
Lol lol lol. You mock 50 tooth chainrings, yet are quite happy to hang dinner plate sized cassettes with sprockets the same size on your rear wheel, so you can now go slow enough. With the resulting dangly bits needed to make it all work, hanging out in the breeze, waiting to get damaged. Strong in the legs, weak in the head springs to mind
speedgz, while I remain 100% unmoved by your inadequate arguments in defense of front shifting on mountain bikes, you have certainly convinced me of one thing. This being that you are a certifiable (and I do mean certifiable) Front Derailleur Zen Master (FDZM). I hope you'll change the 'custom user title' in your MTBR profile from the generic "mtbr member" to FDZM to acknowledge your elevated standing among technology-resistant front derailleur holdouts (doubtless a sub-chapter of the aging bicycle retro-grouch movement).

I don't need to delineate the reasons front shifting on mountain bikes sucks compared to rear shifting -- you did so previously in a deficient attempt to convince the larger universe how easy it is to go through the perfectly timed lever throws & slack-pedaling gyrations needed to execute a decent front shift. In any case I have a trophy I'd like to send you to acknowledge your amazing front shifting prowess. Please forward your mailing address plus $20 to cover shipping & handling.
=sParty

P.S. Looking forward to more posts from you on MTBR -- hopefully in support of 26 inch wheels, rim brakes, QRs, static-length seatposts, narrow rims, et al.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
35,025 Posts
Lol lol lol. You mock 50 tooth chainrings, yet are quite happy to hang dinner plate sized cassettes with sprockets the same size on your rear wheel
The largest I have is a 44, but that one is a little to large, all my others are 40 or 42 (4 of em). Thanks for your totally asinine assumption.

The reason I mock 50t front rings was that they were an attempt to get gearing so high you could go 40mph or something if you could theoretically pedal that fast. The 50t on a rear cassette is far better suited to mountain biking. The problem is that people don't really "spin out" like they think in the high gears. IF you are turning a 40 or 50t front ring at 20rpm, your pedal efforts are not making you go fast AND you are pedaling at a cadence that makes you slower overall, IE standing up and powering in a really hard gear on flats or downhill. That wastes energy and you have tons of increased wind resistance to fight. If you are truly pedaling 100rpm in a 32t ring up front, then by all means, go for a bigger front rings or maybe even two, but guess what, that simply isn't what happens on rides in virtually any terrain. Unless you are Nino Schurter, I'm going to hedge that you don't pedal anywhere near 100rpm in those gears.

Another reason why road bikes can use higher gearing is drafting. Drafting is absolutely huge in it's effect and being able to increase the speed of a peleton or a few riders, one person can kind of sprint/ride at an unsustainable speed, while the others can take advantage of the lowered resistance, all using higher gearing than would be possible if there was no drafting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: austink26

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
JusT learn to fit up yourself and you will be able to be annoyed with your own incompetence.

All I sub out these days us wheel trueing/building and shock rebuilds.

Everything is pretty much wrenching with allen keys.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
It is 2020 and we still have people saying front derailleurs on mountain bikes are a good thing.......

Next up: rear suspension is a waste and only a crutch for people who can’t choose good lines, disc brakes are for hacks who can’t set up v brakes (i can skid a v brake so they are powerful), and clipless pedals are a scam, powerstraps are better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
810 Posts
Next up: rear suspension is a waste and only a crutch for people who can’t choose good lines, disc brakes are for hacks who can’t set up v brakes (i can skid a v brake so they are powerful), and clipless pedals are a scam, powerstraps are better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All of that is actually true.


Sent from my backyard using smoke signals
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
All of that is actually true.


Sent from my backyard using smoke signals
Yesterday I actually saw a couple with powerstraps. They also had tri bars and the husband had bar ends on uncut 800mm bars. They were on 650+ bikes and it was all very confusing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
It is 2020 and we still have people saying front derailleurs on mountain bikes are a good thing.......

Next up: rear suspension is a waste and only a crutch for people who can’t choose good lines, disc brakes are for hacks who can’t set up v brakes (i can skid a v brake so they are powerful), and clipless pedals are a scam, powerstraps are better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I read through the thread again, just to make sure I wasn't missing something, and it appears the only person actually writing that, was you. Ride whatever works for you. All options have their positive and negative points, choice is good. Closed minds should come with closed mouths. IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
718 Posts
I read through the thread again, just to make sure I wasn't missing something, and it appears the only person actually writing that, was you. Ride whatever works for you. All options have their positive and negative points, choice is good. Closed minds should come with closed mouths. IMO.
Rereading this thread was definitely not worth your time. Im going to put a triple on my bike and have 36 gears. May need some of your tips on tuning it. I never got fd’s to work well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Out spokin'
In cog? Neato!
Joined
·
11,487 Posts
I read through the thread again, just to make sure I wasn't missing something, and it appears the only person actually writing that, was you. Ride whatever works for you. All options have their positive and negative points, choice is good. Closed minds should come with closed mouths. IMO.
I’m left feeling indescribably ambivalent by your words, speedygz. I feel so lucky & informed... yet at the same time, unlucky and misinformed.

You missed the mark. Oh well. Perhaps in future posts...
=sParty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
967 Posts
I would like a form a derivative of Goodwins Law for mountains bikes.

"Every discussion on an MTB forum will arrive at the FD or no FD discussion, given enough time"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
I would like a form a derivative of Goodwins Law for mountains bikes.

"Every discussion on an MTB forum will arrive at the FD or no FD discussion, given enough time"
I actually have a foot in both camps :) Personally, I think 2x10, with 10 teeth or less difference in the chainrings, and an 11-40 or 42 cassette, makes one of the slickest and best bang for buck drivetrains for the range out there. It's ridiculously cheap. You can ride it two ways. As a 1x10 with a bonus overdrive for down hills etc, or with a bonus quick access crawler gear for short steep pinches. Actually, make that 3. The FD shifts that well in that configuration, it's so close to a RD shift it's not worth thinking about. So just ride and forget.
Edit -for my next experiment, I'm going to give a side swing FD a spin. They're supposed to be lighter & quicker shifting again. Will get to it one of these days. When I wear out my current 1x11 at a guess :)
 

·
Out spokin'
In cog? Neato!
Joined
·
11,487 Posts
I loved your vid! Bravo! Total respect for you tinkering with all those rings & cogs & mechs & ders & cables & shifters (not to mention your custom chainstays are waaaay over the top!) THANK YOU for going to such lengths to assemble that system plus make your nifty vid. Anyway after watching the entire thing (really, I did) I'm left even more convinced that the wide range 1x drivetrain is superior to any multi-ring setup for the extreme terrain I enjoy aboard my mountain bike. Obviously & of course I'm talking about what serves ME best on MY terrain here.

Others may ride lesser grades where a tight chain under load can be pushed back & forth between chainrings or they may simply be willing to perform the required "FD dance" (yeah, I can do it, but why would I?) and that's cool for them. But not for me. My bike serves me, not the other way 'round. Personally I see zero point in going to such mental & physical efforts when today's single ring drivetrain shifting is flawless to the point that no thought or physical/timing tricks are required. Just hit the shift lever and keep pedaling regardless of drivetrain load. You touched on this point in your awesome vid. Thanks for that, too.

So in the end MAD respect to you for your 3x12 experiment and may it lead you to whichever drivetrain system eventually serves you best (you hinted at 2x12 in your vid). Meanwhile in my own whatever-serves-me-best world I'm fortunate enough to be able to avoid the need for the added complexity and subsequent mastery of the arcane timing & confusion that class B mechanisms like FDs require.

Ride on!
=sParty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
388 Posts
I loved your vid! Bravo! Total respect for you tinkering with all those rings & cogs & mechs & ders & cables & shifters (not to mention your custom chainstays are waaaay over the top!) THANK YOU for going to such lengths to assemble that system plus make your nifty vid. Anyway after watching the entire thing (really, I did) I'm left even more convinced that the wide range 1x drivetrain is superior to any multi-ring setup for the extreme terrain I enjoy aboard my mountain bike. Obviously & of course I'm talking about what serves ME best on MY terrain here.

Others may ride lesser grades where a tight chain under load can be pushed back & forth between chainrings or they may simply be willing to perform the required "FD dance" (yeah, I can do it, but why would I?) and that's cool for them. But not for me. My bike serves me, not the other way 'round. Personally I see zero point in going to such mental & physical efforts when today's single ring drivetrain shifting is flawless to the point that no thought or physical/timing tricks are required. Just hit the shift lever and keep pedaling regardless of drivetrain load. You touched on this point in your awesome vid. Thanks for that, too.

So in the end MAD respect to you for your 3x12 experiment and may it lead you to whichever drivetrain system eventually serves you best (you hinted at 2x12 in your vid). Meanwhile in my own whatever-serves-me-best world I'm fortunate enough to be able to avoid the need for the added complexity and subsequent mastery of the arcane timing & confusion that class B mechanisms like FDs require.

Ride on!
=sParty
That's quite a change of tune from your original statement of "all FD's should immediately be removed and thrown in the bin"
 
61 - 80 of 87 Posts
Top