SRAM 1X Groupset?

[Si]

A fair bit of discussion here:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=116674

[AndyK]

You should be able to use the standard 11 speed Apex right shifter along with the Apex brake only shifter for a mechanical setup. But I guess that combination may not be available as a groupset and you will have to buy the components separately..

Tredz currently sell the Rival RH 11-speed brake/shifter for £90 - the same price as the Apex - and the Rival LH brake lever for £40. That seems like reasonable value (where "value" is a relative term in the context of ludicrously-overpriced road brake/gear levers). I was actually looking at the 10-speed lever, which again is £90 at Tredz but the other parts seem to be much cheaper than 11-speed.

[0xymoron]

I converted both my road and MTB bikes to 1x at the beginning of last year, simply by buying narrow-wide chainrings (~ £20 each off Ebay) and ditching the front derailleur and shifter. I MUCH prefer 1x (but then I've always hated front derailleurs). I kept the original cassettes and have no problem with gear ranges, but then I ride in East Anglia and have no need for very high / low gears.

I recently bought a 29er with a modern 11 speed SRAM 1x system, which has a much bigger gear range than the conversions. The big jumps don't bother me at all. The only thing I would say is that the SRAM rear derailleur operation is quite clunky compared to the old Shimano derailleurs on the conversions, but it is absolutely rock soild (I think there's a clutch in the mechanism). I dont know if the road versions are so clunky - if that's important to you you might want to check it out.

[steady eddy]

There is an examination of the 1x gear set up in this months copy of the Cyclist. It might be worth reading. Simplicity gets a thumbs up but the bigger steps in gears is flagged up as is the issue of chain alignment.

[reohn2]

There is an examination of the 1x gear set up in this months copy of the Cyclist. It might be worth reading. Simplicity gets a thumbs up but the bigger steps in gears is flagged up as is the issue of chain alignment.

And range?

My first bike with gears was a 50's Carlton bought second hand for me by my Mam,it had 10 gears,2x5,a Bemelux rear mech(which was swapped PDQ for a Huret,and a front mech operated via a rod on the seatube.When I found a 3x6 drivetrain I was in clover.Much later when could afford two bikes a lightweight and a tourer 2x7 and 3x7sp resulted in softer,more luxurious and greener clover.
Later still and 3x8sp and 3x9sp lead to clover of a technicoloured green that was bouncier than a sprung mattress
Of course it doesn't stop there,why not 10 or 11sp even?
I was forced into 3x10sp as it was fitted to my newest bike a Genesis Longitude a great machine but too many ratios,3x8 would be enough or a 13x36 10sp cassette may work as the 22/30/40x11 is never used.
I've no fear or hatred of front mechs and changers as they're easier to operate than rears,and give me no trouble whatsoever,in fact I can only think of two or maybe three occasssions when I've dropped a chain on the front which caaused me to solve that problem with an Ngear Jumpstop.
I like the progression of a custom made cassette that suits my rather aging legs and somewhat wisen body,that progression is like a favourite armchair's familiarity whatever chainring I deen suitable to choose at the front for any given terrain,and is like having the right tool to hand,sort of like using a well honed 1/2 inch chisel instead of a screwdriver to smooth out a trench in a hardwood halflap joint.It works and works well in a very satisfying way.
I understand the 1x10/11sp argument but find its application retrograde and clumsy,a tool with limited use that is more than covered by a more robust and refined 3x9sp system.

My 2d's worth,please have pity on an old man living in the past.....

[buddyboy]

[What sort of bike?

My winter/touring bike has a SRAM gearing setup that in effect when used as my winter bike gives me a 1x setup with a 42 tooth chainring and 11-36 10 speed cassette. I find this gear range works pretty well for winter club rides in the hills around the W. Yorks Pennines. Possibly slightly under-geared when out with faster groups. It is actually a double chainset but I only use the smaller inner ring when touring.

Interested to see what gear range you choose and how you get on with it]

Based on a bit of research I'm looking at 44t Front and10-42 teeth rear- I live near the North Kent Downs so quite hilly in places so I figure I'd need sufficiently low gearing...

[gloomyandy]

Do you need the 10 rear cog? One of the things that puts me off the current SRAM 1X system is the need for a different freehub (SRAM XG) to allow the use of the 10-42 cassette. This pretty much commits you to using only 10-42. If you don't need to the 10 rear cog then you can use the Apex 11-42 cassette on a conventional 11 speed freehub. This probably gives you a wider choice of wheels and also allows the use of other SRAM/Shimano cassettes if you find the 11-42 too wide a range. 44/11 gives 28mph at around 90rpm cadence, the 10 cog ups this to 31mph. I guess it depends how fast you ride and how much you spin!

[reohn2]

The more cogs there are on the cassette the more specialised the the hub becomes,the more specialised the higher the cost ,the higher the cost the less likely shops are to stock the bits.
The way modern 'improvements' to drivetrains become the less they offer.

[Brucey]

taking a step back from this you can understand why the manufacturers might welcome 1x gearing;

1) there are designers who are challenged with 'improving the breed', or at least appearing to do so, in order that their employers have something new and shiny to push out there. They have perhaps run out of better ideas than this.

2) lighter and simpler sells fairly easily, especially to novice cyclists.

3) simpler (fewer parts) means 'cheaper to make' and 'cheaper to fit' which the bike manufacturers like

4) 'different' means you can charge almost what you like for a while until the opposition either 'catches up' or gives the idea (no matter how daft) more credence by appearing to compete with it.

Historically, every time an additional sprocket has been added at the rear, someone has said 'look, for this application, you don't need to have more than one chainring any more!'. This is the latest in a long line of such claims.

For MTBing it almost makes some sense (cost, no 'block shift' available, and gear range aside), but for touring and commuting rather less so IMHO. The reason is that if you set a gear range terminating in a top gear of 90-100", you will leave yourself with a most used gear (typically between 60" and 70") which uses a pathetically small sprocket, usually a 13T or 14T one. These are inefficient and just wear out very quickly. Add in the 'no choice but a bad choice' chainlines in many of the gears and overall I do not think this is the way ahead for road bikes.

cheers

[gloomyandy]

The reason is that if you set a gear range terminating in a top gear of 90-100", you will leave yourself with a most used gear (typically between 60" and 70") which uses a pathetically small sprocket, usually a 13T or 14T one. These are inefficient and just wear out very quickly. Add in the 'no choice but a bad choice' chainlines in many of the gears and overall I do not think this is the way ahead for road bikes.

cheers

With a 700x32 wheel setup, a 42 chainring and 11-42 cassette you get a top gear of 103" and your sweet spot of 60-70 falls on the 17 (66.7") and 19(59.7") sprockets which are 4th and 5th on the cassette. So not really that small a cog or that bad a chainline.

[Brucey]

With a 700x32 wheel setup, a 42 chainring and 11-42 cassette you get a top gear of 103" and your sweet spot of 60-70 falls on the 17 (66.7") and 19(59.7") sprockets which are 4th and 5th on the cassette. So not really that small a cog or that bad a chainline.

Fair point but that setup gives you a few high gears that are of little use (I'd sooner have a stronger wheel with fewer sprockets and less dish) and a bottom gear that is a gnats under 28", which isn't low enough for many tourists. If you set a 10-42T cassette (say) to give a top gear of 90" and a bottom gear of 21" (a good touring range..?) then using the 13T sprocket still doesn't crack 70".

Maybe there is a reasonable compromise in there for some folk but if you ride a lot at about 70" and don't need a top gear much over 90" and set the gearing accordingly (as many tourists do) then you are likely to use the smaller sprockets to excess IMHO.

cheers

[gloomyandy]

I don't think anyone here was suggesting that a 1X is ideal for touring, any more than a triple would be a good choice on a TT bike. I'd happily use that setup for general/winter riding.

[Brucey]

I don't think anyone here was suggesting that a 1X is ideal for touring, any more than a triple would be a good choice on a TT bike. I'd happily use that setup for general/winter riding.

I'd argue that there are plenty of 'better' setups (depending on your priorities) than a 1x system for general use/winter riding too.

BTW I have used a triple on a TT bike...

cheers

[pete75]

If you want a single on the front and a lot of gear son the back Rohloff provided the solution years ago.

[Tiberius]

If you want a single on the front and a lot of gear son the back Rohloff provided the solution years ago.

......you beat me to it......