Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[ted]

When I lived in south east Mi. a long time ago, I had a bike with 44-52 chain 
rings and a 14-18 straight block. It was great. These days, living in the SF 
east Bay Area, I'm really pleased with 30-46 rings and a 9sp 11-32 cassette. I 
am convinced that the "right" gear setup is entirely dependent on the rider, 
type of riding, and terrain. The only thing I think approaches being 
universally "right" about gearing is the notion that having your typical 
cruising gear near the middle of the cassette is a good idea. Well that and 
whatever ideal is for you, lots of variations from it can still be perfectly 
serviceable.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Thanks Dave!

With abandon,
Patrick

On Saturday, March 29, 2014 2:53:17 PM UTC-6, Dave Johnston wrote:
>
> Patrick asked me to elaborate on what I liked about a 42t-28t double set 
> up. Sorry it took so long to respond. This thread is about a single chain 
> ring setup and I haven't been able to mentally come up with a mathematical 
> combination of a single chain ring and 8spd cassette that would really 
> cover the range I want and put the cruising gears in a nice location. If I 
> did go single I would give up the high end, or I would leave a granny in 
> place, remove the FD and shift with a stick if desperate.
>
> Previous to finding the BBG- 42-28 double setup, my preferred  gearing was 
> a triple with a 48-38-26 in front and and a 12-28 or 13-30, 7s or 8s in 
> back. Like Patrick I found  I rarely used the outer ring. My preferred 
> cruising gear is around 64" so by moving up to a 42t in front and an 11-32t 
> in the back my chain line was mostly centered for my cruising gears. My 
> highest gear was ~100" (plenty for me) and for riding around these parts I 
> rarely have to shift into the granny, so its like the simplicity of a 
> single up front, but I still have the granny available if I go somewhere 
> where there is an actually hill. I'm not used to actual hills so the granny 
> becomes necessary if I ever leave town. I also really like having the guard 
> as the outer ring. I've ripped up and stained many a pair of pants and 
> ripped a few shoe laces out on those outer teeth.
>
> PS: I tried a 46-32 and 12-28 combo for awhile and I hated it. That 
> particular combo found me constantly shifting in the front and cross 
> chaining to find my preferred cruising gears. Somebody who was a stronger 
> cyclist or weaker cyclist or lived in rolling terrain might love it though. 
> I think fitness and terrain play a big role in optimal gearing, so if you 
> want to go non-stock this can be a real personal choice. It amazes me that 
> bike shops sell the same gears to people who live in Illinois and Colorado. 
> I grew up in Illinois where I didn't need a granny and only shifted to the 
> big ring if I got a great tailwind.
>
> David Johnston
>
>
> On Monday, March 24, 2014 9:12:12 PM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, Dave. Would you mind elaborating on what you love about the wide 
>> range double? I realize we ride different surfaces and terrain, but I am 
>> trying to understand the experiential difference. Can I use all the gears 
>> in each?
>>
>> With abandon,
>> Patrick
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Dave Johnston]

Patrick asked me to elaborate on what I liked about a 42t-28t double set 
up. Sorry it took so long to respond. This thread is about a single chain 
ring setup and I haven't been able to mentally come up with a mathematical 
combination of a single chain ring and 8spd cassette that would really 
cover the range I want and put the cruising gears in a nice location. If I 
did go single I would give up the high end, or I would leave a granny in 
place, remove the FD and shift with a stick if desperate.

Previous to finding the BBG- 42-28 double setup, my preferred  gearing was 
a triple with a 48-38-26 in front and and a 12-28 or 13-30, 7s or 8s in 
back. Like Patrick I found  I rarely used the outer ring. My preferred 
cruising gear is around 64" so by moving up to a 42t in front and an 11-32t 
in the back my chain line was mostly centered for my cruising gears. My 
highest gear was ~100" (plenty for me) and for riding around these parts I 
rarely have to shift into the granny, so its like the simplicity of a 
single up front, but I still have the granny available if I go somewhere 
where there is an actually hill. I'm not used to actual hills so the granny 
becomes necessary if I ever leave town. I also really like having the guard 
as the outer ring. I've ripped up and stained many a pair of pants and 
ripped a few shoe laces out on those outer teeth.

PS: I tried a 46-32 and 12-28 combo for awhile and I hated it. That 
particular combo found me constantly shifting in the front and cross 
chaining to find my preferred cruising gears. Somebody who was a stronger 
cyclist or weaker cyclist or lived in rolling terrain might love it though. 
I think fitness and terrain play a big role in optimal gearing, so if you 
want to go non-stock this can be a real personal choice. It amazes me that 
bike shops sell the same gears to people who live in Illinois and Colorado. 
I grew up in Illinois where I didn't need a granny and only shifted to the 
big ring if I got a great tailwind.

David Johnston


On Monday, March 24, 2014 9:12:12 PM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Thanks, Dave. Would you mind elaborating on what you love about the wide 
> range double? I realize we ride different surfaces and terrain, but I am 
> trying to understand the experiential difference. Can I use all the gears 
> in each?
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Montclair BobbyB]

Philip:  It IS about chain line, but it's also in defense of the front 
derailleur, which to me is indispensible.

BB

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 7:08:29 PM UTC-4, Philip Williamson wrote:
>
> I couldn't get my brain around you loving 5 speed internal gear hubs but 
> hating a 1x setup because they lack a front derailleur... unless it's all 
> about chainline. 
> For me, after riding a fixed or dingle setup, having NINE GEARS to choose 
> from is a crazy luxury. 
>
> Philip
> www.biketinker.com
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:08:55 PM UTC-7, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
>> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
>> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
>> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
>> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
>> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
>> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
>> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
>> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
>> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>>
>> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost 
>> you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the 
>> tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to 
>> send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>>
>> Peace,
>>
>> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>>
>> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:
>>>
>>> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to 
>>> a simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
>>> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
>>> thinking about making the change.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>>>
>>> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>>>
>>> 113mm Bottom bracket
>>>
>>> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>>>
>>> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>>>
>>> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just 
>>> take off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar 
>>> thickness.  There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring 
>>> bolts were too long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones 
>>> that were designed for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem 
>>> Solvers”; these ended up working fine, though I ended up having to use the 
>>> old longer crankset “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
>>> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
>>> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
>>> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
>>> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
>>> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
>>> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
>>> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
>>> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
>>> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
>>> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
>>> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
>>> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
>>> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
>>> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
>>> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
>>> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
>>> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
>>> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
>>> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
>>> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
>>> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
>>> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just a bit 
>>> further away from the chain.  This has worked great; no rubbing, and no 
>>> drops of the chain under any conditions so far.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> Can you just leave the front derailler in place, instead of messing 
>>> round with these chain protectors?  Probably, but then you would have s

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Philip Williamson]

I couldn't get my brain around you loving 5 speed internal gear hubs but 
hating a 1x setup because they lack a front derailleur... unless it's all 
about chainline. 
For me, after riding a fixed or dingle setup, having NINE GEARS to choose 
from is a crazy luxury. 

Philip
www.biketinker.com

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:08:55 PM UTC-7, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>
> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost 
> you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the 
> tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to 
> send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>
> Peace,
>
> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>
> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:
>>
>> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to 
>> a simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
>> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>>
>>  
>>
>> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
>> thinking about making the change.
>>
>>  
>>
>> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>>
>> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>>
>> 113mm Bottom bracket
>>
>> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>>
>> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>>
>> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>>
>>  
>>
>> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just take 
>> off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar thickness.  
>> There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring bolts were too 
>> long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones that were designed 
>> for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem Solvers”; these ended 
>> up working fine, though I ended up having to use the old longer crankset 
>> “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>>
>>  
>>
>> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
>> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
>> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
>> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
>> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
>> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
>> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
>> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
>> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
>> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
>> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>>
>>  
>>
>> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
>> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
>> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
>> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
>> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
>> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
>> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
>> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
>> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
>> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
>> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
>> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
>> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just a bit 
>> further away from the chain.  This has worked great; no rubbing, and no 
>> drops of the chain under any conditions so far.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Can you just leave the front derailler in place, instead of messing round 
>> with these chain protectors?  Probably, but then you would have still have 
>> to be ‘trimming’ the derailler using your left hand to prevent rubbing.  In 
>> my setup, the left hand does nothing except braking now.
>>
>>  
>>
>> One other thing I did was take a few links out of the chain, since it 
>> never leaves the 34t chainring (it used to have to be long enoug

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains; morphed into cogset widths; now morphing into drivetrain wear.

[Ron Mc]

my 2 cents is that chainline is everything in chain wear.  Wide 11-rear and 
a compact crank gives you a lot of versatility and no waste, but I can see 
how chainline is generally better on wide 7-rear and a triple crank.  

On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 4:26:50 PM UTC-5, Patrick Moore wrote:
>
> I read all sorts of contradictory information about the wear of narrower 
> chains and cogs. Some swear up and down that 10 speed systems wear just 
> fine. The last thing I heard from someone at a bike shop was that his 9 
> speed Shimano drivetrain wore faster, but his new 10 lasts at least as long 
> as 8. Sample of one, of course, but I have heard people claiming that 9/10 
> drivetrains wear just fine, whatever that means.
>
> Matter for another thread, I see.
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Tim Gavin 
> 
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> However, the 9, 10, and 11 speed chains are increasingly thinner. 
>>  Internet response seems to feel that the thinner chains wear out 
>> dramatically sooner than a 6-7-8 speed chain.
>>
>>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains; morphed into cogset widths; now morphing into drivetrain wear.

[Patrick Moore]

I read all sorts of contradictory information about the wear of narrower
chains and cogs. Some swear up and down that 10 speed systems wear just
fine. The last thing I heard from someone at a bike shop was that his 9
speed Shimano drivetrain wore faster, but his new 10 lasts at least as long
as 8. Sample of one, of course, but I have heard people claiming that 9/10
drivetrains wear just fine, whatever that means.

Matter for another thread, I see.

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Tim Gavin
wrote:

>
> However, the 9, 10, and 11 speed chains are increasingly thinner.
>  Internet response seems to feel that the thinner chains wear out
> dramatically sooner than a 6-7-8 speed chain.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Tim Gavin]

Given the same chain, the wider cassettes would cause a tiny bit more
"cross-flex".  Probably not worth worrying about.

However, the 9, 10, and 11 speed chains are increasingly thinner.  Internet
response seems to feel that the thinner chains wear out dramatically sooner
than a 6-7-8 speed chain.


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Patrick Moore  wrote:

> Of course, of course.
>
> I note that there is a 1.1 mm difference between S 8 and 9. Is this spec
> or is it manufacturing tolerance?
>
> So, between 5 and Shimano 10, 132 mm, or just shy of 7 mm of additional
> chain flex. Certainly not inconsiderable, but still, with modern chains and
> long stays, I don't think it's a huge issue, particularly if these cross
> chain gears are relatively little used.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Tim Gavin  > wrote:
>
>> C'mon, Patrick, you know where to find this info.
>>
>> http://sheldonbrown.com/cribsheet-spacing.html
>>
>> AASHHTA!  (although it doesn't have 11 speed Shimano on there yet)
>>
>>
>>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Patrick Moore]

Of course, of course.

I note that there is a 1.1 mm difference between S 8 and 9. Is this spec or
is it manufacturing tolerance?

So, between 5 and Shimano 10, 132 mm, or just shy of 7 mm of additional
chain flex. Certainly not inconsiderable, but still, with modern chains and
long stays, I don't think it's a huge issue, particularly if these cross
chain gears are relatively little used.


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Tim Gavin
wrote:

> C'mon, Patrick, you know where to find this info.
>
> http://sheldonbrown.com/cribsheet-spacing.html
>
> AASHHTA!  (although it doesn't have 11 speed Shimano on there yet)
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Tim Gavin]

C'mon, Patrick, you know where to find this info.

http://sheldonbrown.com/cribsheet-spacing.html

AASHHTA!  (although it doesn't have 11 speed Shimano on there yet)



On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Patrick Moore  wrote:

> In my experience fiddling with these things, this is what I've found. All
> Shimano, since I've never used any other system (well, Am Classic 10 sp
> cassette, but it was designed for use on a Shimano hub).
>
> 7 speed is narrower than 8; the freehub body is a wee bit shorter.
>
> 8 and 9 are the same width; 9 speed spacers and, I daresay, 9 speed cogs
> are a wee bit narrower.
>
> 10 speed cassettes fit onto the 8/9 speed carrier but the are designed
> with a cutout to fit over the rear flange of this carrier, and thus extend
> a wee bit inward compared to the flush-ending 8s and 9s. (I daresay that
> the spacer and cogs are a wee bit narrower yet.
>
> 11 I don't know from, since I've never used one.
>
> Thus from 5 to 6 to 7 to 8, the cassettes got a wee bit wider with each
> added cog. 8 to 9, the same overall width. 9 to 10, a wee bit wider.
>
> Does anyone know from actual eyeball and hands-on measuring what the
> actual widths of 5 sp fws and 6, 7, 8/9, and 10 speed cassettes are? As
> much as a cm between 5 and 10? If so, that's not much for a modern, flexy
> chain on 44 cm chainstays.
>
> As Grant replied once when I once fretted to him about wear and chain
> angle (I am paraphrasing his wordza wizdum): "If you are riding enough to
> cause considerably higher drivetrain wear at these angles, then count your
> blessings because you are riding a lot!?
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Jim Bronson wrote:
>
>> Regarding widening of the cogset, not all the 10/11 speed setups are
>> wider.  Feel free to correct me here but this is my understanding:
>>
>> Shimano's 11 is wider than their 7(+spacer)-8-9-10.  The 11 speed setup
>> uses a different hub.  The 10 speed is no different than the 8 speed in
>> total cassette width.  The actual gears and chain are smaller of course, as
>> is the spacing between gears.
>>
>> Campy uses the same hub setup for their 9-10-11 (don't know about 8).
>>  Using the same hub architecture is probably one reason Campy was able to
>> roll out 11 speed across their product line fairly quickly.  I assume the
>> spacing and the chain must be smaller than the 10 since the hub is not any
>> wider.
>>
>> I don't know what SRAM's 11 speed offering is.
>>
>> Anyway, carry on :)
>>
>> --
> Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and letters that get interviews.
> By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
> Other professional writing services.
> http://www.resumespecialties.com/
> Patrick Moore
> Albuquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Etats Unis
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Patrick Moore]

Note that a full cm in additional width between 5 and 10 would mean a total
deflection to each side of only 5 mm.


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Patrick Moore  wrote:

>  As much as a cm between 5 and 10?
>
> --
Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and letters that get interviews.
By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
Other professional writing services.
http://www.resumespecialties.com/
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Etats Unis

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Patrick Moore]

In my experience fiddling with these things, this is what I've found. All
Shimano, since I've never used any other system (well, Am Classic 10 sp
cassette, but it was designed for use on a Shimano hub).

7 speed is narrower than 8; the freehub body is a wee bit shorter.

8 and 9 are the same width; 9 speed spacers and, I daresay, 9 speed cogs
are a wee bit narrower.

10 speed cassettes fit onto the 8/9 speed carrier but the are designed with
a cutout to fit over the rear flange of this carrier, and thus extend a wee
bit inward compared to the flush-ending 8s and 9s. (I daresay that the
spacer and cogs are a wee bit narrower yet.

11 I don't know from, since I've never used one.

Thus from 5 to 6 to 7 to 8, the cassettes got a wee bit wider with each
added cog. 8 to 9, the same overall width. 9 to 10, a wee bit wider.

Does anyone know from actual eyeball and hands-on measuring what the actual
widths of 5 sp fws and 6, 7, 8/9, and 10 speed cassettes are? As much as a
cm between 5 and 10? If so, that's not much for a modern, flexy chain on 44
cm chainstays.

As Grant replied once when I once fretted to him about wear and chain angle
(I am paraphrasing his wordza wizdum): "If you are riding enough to cause
considerably higher drivetrain wear at these angles, then count your
blessings because you are riding a lot!?




On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Jim Bronson  wrote:

> Regarding widening of the cogset, not all the 10/11 speed setups are
> wider.  Feel free to correct me here but this is my understanding:
>
> Shimano's 11 is wider than their 7(+spacer)-8-9-10.  The 11 speed setup
> uses a different hub.  The 10 speed is no different than the 8 speed in
> total cassette width.  The actual gears and chain are smaller of course, as
> is the spacing between gears.
>
> Campy uses the same hub setup for their 9-10-11 (don't know about 8).
>  Using the same hub architecture is probably one reason Campy was able to
> roll out 11 speed across their product line fairly quickly.  I assume the
> spacing and the chain must be smaller than the 10 since the hub is not any
> wider.
>
> I don't know what SRAM's 11 speed offering is.
>
> Anyway, carry on :)
>
> --
Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and letters that get interviews.
By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
Other professional writing services.
http://www.resumespecialties.com/
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Etats Unis

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Jim Bronson]

Regarding widening of the cogset, not all the 10/11 speed setups are wider.
 Feel free to correct me here but this is my understanding:

Shimano's 11 is wider than their 7(+spacer)-8-9-10.  The 11 speed setup
uses a different hub.  The 10 speed is no different than the 8 speed in
total cassette width.  The actual gears and chain are smaller of course, as
is the spacing between gears.

Campy uses the same hub setup for their 9-10-11 (don't know about 8).
 Using the same hub architecture is probably one reason Campy was able to
roll out 11 speed across their product line fairly quickly.  I assume the
spacing and the chain must be smaller than the 10 since the hub is not any
wider.

I don't know what SRAM's 11 speed offering is.

Anyway, carry on :)


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Patrick Moore  wrote:

> I agree with Doug. The middle rings of triples have for a long time been
> generally OK'd for all the rear cogs, and while adding #s10 and 11 have
> widened the cogset a bit, with the long stays that most listers have and
> with modern very flexible chains I agree it is largely a non-issue.
>
> And this comes from someone who deliberately sets up his drivetrains with
> the cruising gear or gears in the straight-chain positions.
>
> My Fargo's 38/24 X 9 is basically a 1X9 with a granny ring for looks and
> conversation. (13-14-15-16-17-18-20-23-27, for 84" down to 41" -- perfectly
> good enough for my type of riding.
>
> Patrick Moore, who in fact just rode it in the bosque using only the 64",
> the 68", and the 61", in that order.
>
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:55 PM, dougP  wrote:
>
>>
>> The concern about cross-chaining seems a bit overdone.  I don't hesitate
>> to use all 8 cogs from the middle ring on my triple (I don't spend much
>> time on the smaller ones but don't worry about it either).  Assuming a
>> single ring set-up uses roughly the mid-position, there shouldn't be any
>> issue with using the entire cogset.  I'll venture we spend over 90% of our
>> time in the middle 4 or 5 or 6 cogs, and chains are pretty flexible.
>>
>> OTH, I don't use my big-big or granny-outer cog as those do create some
>> pretty hairy chainline offsets.
>>
>> dougP
>>
>> --
> Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and letters that get interviews.
> By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
> Other professional writing services.
> http://www.resumespecialties.com/
> Patrick Moore
> Albuquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Etats Unis
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down!

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Patrick Moore]

I agree with Doug. The middle rings of triples have for a long time been
generally OK'd for all the rear cogs, and while adding #s10 and 11 have
widened the cogset a bit, with the long stays that most listers have and
with modern very flexible chains I agree it is largely a non-issue.

And this comes from someone who deliberately sets up his drivetrains with
the cruising gear or gears in the straight-chain positions.

My Fargo's 38/24 X 9 is basically a 1X9 with a granny ring for looks and
conversation. (13-14-15-16-17-18-20-23-27, for 84" down to 41" -- perfectly
good enough for my type of riding.

Patrick Moore, who in fact just rode it in the bosque using only the 64",
the 68", and the 61", in that order.

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:55 PM, dougP  wrote:

>
> The concern about cross-chaining seems a bit overdone.  I don't hesitate
> to use all 8 cogs from the middle ring on my triple (I don't spend much
> time on the smaller ones but don't worry about it either).  Assuming a
> single ring set-up uses roughly the mid-position, there shouldn't be any
> issue with using the entire cogset.  I'll venture we spend over 90% of our
> time in the middle 4 or 5 or 6 cogs, and chains are pretty flexible.
>
> OTH, I don't use my big-big or granny-outer cog as those do create some
> pretty hairy chainline offsets.
>
> dougP
>
> --
Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, and letters that get interviews.
By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
Other professional writing services.
http://www.resumespecialties.com/
Patrick Moore
Albuquerque, Nouvelle Mexique, Etats Unis

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[dougP]

"I run my Handsome Speedy as a 1x (8or9 depending on the wheelset) and 
never care too much about cross chaining or anything else on it.  It might 
wear my chain a tad faster, but it is only going to be used for a season 
anyway.   $15 toss a new one on and forget it for another year."

The concern about cross-chaining seems a bit overdone.  I don't hesitate to 
use all 8 cogs from the middle ring on my triple (I don't spend much time 
on the smaller ones but don't worry about it either).  Assuming a single 
ring set-up uses roughly the mid-position, there shouldn't be any issue 
with using the entire cogset.  I'll venture we spend over 90% of our time 
in the middle 4 or 5 or 6 cogs, and chains are pretty flexible.  

OTH, I don't use my big-big or granny-outer cog as those do create some 
pretty hairy chainline offsets.  

dougP


On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 6:14:19 AM UTC-7, Skenry wrote:
>
> I think that for people who tend to ride bikes to the extent that they are 
> on this list would be fairly well versed in bike maintenance.   Thus doing 
> things like preventative maintenance shouldn't be that big of a deal.   I 
> tend to install a new chain about once a year, I actually just ordered 2 
> for some weekend garage time.
>
> I run my Handsome Speedy as a 1x (8or9 depending on the wheelset) and 
> never care too much about cross chaining or anything else on it.  It might 
> wear my chain a tad faster, but it is only going to be used for a season 
> anyway.   $15 toss a new one on and forget it for another year.
>
> I will be honest, and say that on my other multi-ring bikes I try not to 
> crosschain, but that is another story.  For a 1x it just isnt really a big 
> deal.  (to me)
>
> Cheers,
> Scott
> Dayton, OH
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 7:02 PM, HunqRider 
> > wrote:
>
>> Bobby,
>> It's all about simplicity.  I used to ride a bike with all the different 
>> gears, a Garmin GPS to track my mileage and speed, a cadence meter, etc.  I 
>> just got sick of all that extra stuff.  On my new bike, I originally had 
>> the double chainrings, but I was never using the big ring, so it made sense 
>> to ditch it and go for the 1x8 setup; easier to keep clean, less to think 
>> about while riding.  Even now I hardly ever spend any time in the small 
>> cogs, so I'm not cross-chaining for a large % of my riding time.  If I 
>> lived in area that was flatter, I'd like to go with a single-speed, but 
>> alas, I need some gears for the hills.
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:08:55 PM UTC-7, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
>>> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
>>> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
>>> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
>>> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
>>> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
>>> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
>>> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
>>> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
>>> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>>>
>>> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have 
>>> cost you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be 
>>> worth the tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please 
>>> feel free to send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>>>
>>> Peace,
>>>
>>> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>>>
>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to 
>> rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com
>> .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[George Schick]

Just for grins, here's the 1x1 set up:



It's an old late 70's Fuji Finest that I restored, replaced the fork, 
repainted, and had a machinist friend take the teeth off the outer 
chainring so it could serve as a bash guard.  Then, I flipped the axle caps 
on the rear Phil hub to move everything over to the right a bit and 
reentered the rim.  It rides like a whisper.

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:47:59 PM UTC-5, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>
> George:
>
> Perhaps you might consider an internal-geared hub?   I am building up a 
> 1x5 Spectro on an old mid-80s Rockhopper... simplicity, decent range, and 
> low-maintenance.
>
> BB  
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:41:20 PM UTC-4, George Schick wrote:
>>
>> Bobby - I agree with you for the most part.  The only reasons I converted 
>> one of my road bikes to a 1xSS are 1) the rails/trails MUPs around the area 
>> here are surfaced with compacted limestone "tailings" or "screenings" (the 
>> final remnant left over from when crushed limestone rock is "sifted" 
>> through various size screens [so the rocks can be sold in different sizes 
>> for driveways, riprap, etc]) and although it makes an OK surface to ride 
>> over for the most part, when the weather has been very dry for a while in 
>> mid-Summer it becomes extremely dusty making derailler drive trains a 
>> maintenance headache.  The single chainring/single cog of the 1xSS's make 
>> cleaning much easier and quicker.  And 2) the area around here is fairly 
>> flat so a rider can get by with one speed without a problem.  Other than 
>> those things, I see SS as mostly just a fad - maybe even a passing fad.
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:08:55 PM UTC-5, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>>>
>>> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
>>> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
>>> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
>>> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
>>> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
>>> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
>>> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
>>> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
>>> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
>>> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>>>
>>> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have 
>>> cost you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be 
>>> worth the tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please 
>>> feel free to send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>>>
>>> Peace,
>>>
>>> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>>>
>>> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:

 Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over 
 to a simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this 
 last year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  

  

 I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
 thinking about making the change.

  

 My original drivetrain configuration was:

 Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)

 113mm Bottom bracket

 Sugino XD2 crankset (double)

 34 and 48 tooth chainrings

 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)

  

 To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just 
 take off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar 
 thickness.  There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring 
 bolts were too long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones 
 that were designed for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem 
 Solvers”; these ended up working fine, though I ended up having to use the 
 old longer crankset “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  

  

 I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
 was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
 cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
 I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
 seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
 the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
 believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
 the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
 especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
 chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.

  

 My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  
 For the inside, I used an 

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Scott Henry]

I think that for people who tend to ride bikes to the extent that they are
on this list would be fairly well versed in bike maintenance.   Thus doing
things like preventative maintenance shouldn't be that big of a deal.   I
tend to install a new chain about once a year, I actually just ordered 2
for some weekend garage time.

I run my Handsome Speedy as a 1x (8or9 depending on the wheelset) and never
care too much about cross chaining or anything else on it.  It might wear
my chain a tad faster, but it is only going to be used for a season anyway.
  $15 toss a new one on and forget it for another year.

I will be honest, and say that on my other multi-ring bikes I try not to
crosschain, but that is another story.  For a 1x it just isnt really a big
deal.  (to me)

Cheers,
Scott
Dayton, OH




On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 7:02 PM, HunqRider  wrote:

> Bobby,
> It's all about simplicity.  I used to ride a bike with all the different
> gears, a Garmin GPS to track my mileage and speed, a cadence meter, etc.  I
> just got sick of all that extra stuff.  On my new bike, I originally had
> the double chainrings, but I was never using the big ring, so it made sense
> to ditch it and go for the 1x8 setup; easier to keep clean, less to think
> about while riding.  Even now I hardly ever spend any time in the small
> cogs, so I'm not cross-chaining for a large % of my riding time.  If I
> lived in area that was flatter, I'd like to go with a single-speed, but
> alas, I need some gears for the hills.
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:08:55 PM UTC-7, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I
>> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite
>> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please
>> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a
>> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want,
>> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme
>> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs
>> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using
>> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have
>> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>>
>> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost
>> you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the
>> tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to
>> send me your unwanted front derailleurs...
>>
>> Peace,
>>
>> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[HunqRider]

Bobby,
It's all about simplicity.  I used to ride a bike with all the different 
gears, a Garmin GPS to track my mileage and speed, a cadence meter, etc.  I 
just got sick of all that extra stuff.  On my new bike, I originally had 
the double chainrings, but I was never using the big ring, so it made sense 
to ditch it and go for the 1x8 setup; easier to keep clean, less to think 
about while riding.  Even now I hardly ever spend any time in the small 
cogs, so I'm not cross-chaining for a large % of my riding time.  If I 
lived in area that was flatter, I'd like to go with a single-speed, but 
alas, I need some gears for the hills.


On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 1:08:55 PM UTC-7, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>
> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost 
> you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the 
> tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to 
> send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>
> Peace,
>
> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[David Banzer]

I think it depends on the terrain one is riding. Here in Chicago, I know I 
will never need more than a single chainring and that using the larger cogs 
or smallest cog in the rear will be at a minimum. I understand concerns 
about cross-chaining, but I know that 99% of my riding will be within the 
middle 4 rear cogs. For me, a 1x8 setup works and it simplifies the 
drivetrain.
David
Flatter than flat Chicago

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:08:55 PM UTC-5, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>
> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost 
> you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the 
> tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to 
> send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>
> Peace,
>
> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>
> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:
>>
>> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to 
>> a simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
>> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>>
>>  
>>
>> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
>> thinking about making the change.
>>
>>  
>>
>> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>>
>> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>>
>> 113mm Bottom bracket
>>
>> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>>
>> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>>
>> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>>
>>  
>>
>> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just take 
>> off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar thickness.  
>> There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring bolts were too 
>> long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones that were designed 
>> for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem Solvers”; these ended 
>> up working fine, though I ended up having to use the old longer crankset 
>> “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>>
>>  
>>
>> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
>> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
>> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
>> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
>> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
>> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
>> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
>> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
>> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
>> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
>> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>>
>>  
>>
>> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
>> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
>> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
>> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
>> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
>> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
>> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
>> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
>> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
>> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
>> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
>> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
>> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just a bit 
>> further away from the chain.  This has worked great; no rubbing, and no 
>> drops of the chain under any conditions so far.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Can you just leave the front derailler in place, instead of messing round 
>> with these chain protectors?  Probably, but then you would have still have 
>> to be ‘trimming’ the derailler using your left hand to prevent rubbing.  In 
>> my setup, the left hand does nothing except braking now.
>>
>>  
>>
>> One other thing I 

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Edwin W]

I ride my Sam everywhere I go, which is mostly to and from work and around 
town, about 2000 miles a year. When I was building it up I got the 
26/40/bashguard Sugino crank from Riv and an 11-28 (32?) 8 speed cassette. 
I delayed putting a front derailer on it until I saw my usage patterns. 
After a year I can see: I am in gears 5-7 95% of the time. I go up to 8 
occasionally and grind in 1 or 2 occasionally on my rare long rides.
I have "stick" shifted into the granny front once on an insanely steep and 
long (for around here) hill last summer.
I had not thought about the stress on chain or rear derailer of the 40-28 
combo, but I use it so rarely enough that I am not stressed. 

So far, the no front derailer, have a granny if I need it, basically 1x8 
system is working.

Edwin in hilly, but not mountainous Nashville, where I mostly ride around 
town and near-in country.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Montclair BobbyB]

George:

Perhaps you might consider an internal-geared hub?   I am building up a 1x5 
Spectro on an old mid-80s Rockhopper... simplicity, decent range, and 
low-maintenance.

BB  

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:41:20 PM UTC-4, George Schick wrote:
>
> Bobby - I agree with you for the most part.  The only reasons I converted 
> one of my road bikes to a 1xSS are 1) the rails/trails MUPs around the area 
> here are surfaced with compacted limestone "tailings" or "screenings" (the 
> final remnant left over from when crushed limestone rock is "sifted" 
> through various size screens [so the rocks can be sold in different sizes 
> for driveways, riprap, etc]) and although it makes an OK surface to ride 
> over for the most part, when the weather has been very dry for a while in 
> mid-Summer it becomes extremely dusty making derailler drive trains a 
> maintenance headache.  The single chainring/single cog of the 1xSS's make 
> cleaning much easier and quicker.  And 2) the area around here is fairly 
> flat so a rider can get by with one speed without a problem.  Other than 
> those things, I see SS as mostly just a fad - maybe even a passing fad.
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:08:55 PM UTC-5, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
>> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
>> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
>> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
>> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
>> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
>> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
>> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
>> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
>> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>>
>> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost 
>> you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the 
>> tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to 
>> send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>>
>> Peace,
>>
>> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>>
>> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:
>>>
>>> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to 
>>> a simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
>>> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
>>> thinking about making the change.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>>>
>>> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>>>
>>> 113mm Bottom bracket
>>>
>>> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>>>
>>> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>>>
>>> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just 
>>> take off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar 
>>> thickness.  There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring 
>>> bolts were too long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones 
>>> that were designed for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem 
>>> Solvers”; these ended up working fine, though I ended up having to use the 
>>> old longer crankset “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
>>> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
>>> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
>>> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
>>> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
>>> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
>>> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
>>> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
>>> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
>>> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
>>> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
>>> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
>>> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
>>> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
>>> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
>>> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
>>> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
>>> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
>>> my setup, when “cross

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[George Schick]

Bobby - I agree with you for the most part.  The only reasons I converted 
one of my road bikes to a 1xSS are 1) the rails/trails MUPs around the area 
here are surfaced with compacted limestone "tailings" or "screenings" (the 
final remnant left over from when crushed limestone rock is "sifted" 
through various size screens [so the rocks can be sold in different sizes 
for driveways, riprap, etc]) and although it makes an OK surface to ride 
over for the most part, when the weather has been very dry for a while in 
mid-Summer it becomes extremely dusty making derailler drive trains a 
maintenance headache.  The single chainring/single cog of the 1xSS's make 
cleaning much easier and quicker.  And 2) the area around here is fairly 
flat so a rider can get by with one speed without a problem.  Other than 
those things, I see SS as mostly just a fad - maybe even a passing fad.

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 3:08:55 PM UTC-5, Montclair BobbyB wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
> believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
> what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
> convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
> triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
> and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
> cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
> on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
> only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
> only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.
>
> I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost 
> you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the 
> tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to 
> send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 
>
> Peace,
>
> Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham
>
> On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:
>>
>> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to 
>> a simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
>> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>>
>>  
>>
>> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
>> thinking about making the change.
>>
>>  
>>
>> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>>
>> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>>
>> 113mm Bottom bracket
>>
>> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>>
>> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>>
>> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>>
>>  
>>
>> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just take 
>> off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar thickness.  
>> There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring bolts were too 
>> long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones that were designed 
>> for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem Solvers”; these ended 
>> up working fine, though I ended up having to use the old longer crankset 
>> “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>>
>>  
>>
>> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
>> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
>> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
>> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
>> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
>> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
>> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
>> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
>> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
>> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
>> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>>
>>  
>>
>> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
>> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
>> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
>> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
>> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
>> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
>> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
>> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
>> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
>> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
>> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
>> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
>> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just 

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Will]

Deacon, 

Map out your most travelled route or routes with Google Pedometer/Earth (or 
similar).  

Extract an elevation profile. 

Discuss those results with the folks at Riv. Or post links here... for 
discussion.  

Seems to me that establishing your vertical terrain challenges is the place 
to start. 

Then you work out gears...  

I do not think a 1x10 setup is particularly useful. I can see a 1x5 (used 
to ride a Raleigh Tourist), but you're going to stress the rear der, the 
chain, and the rings, with a 1x10. 

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:41:21 PM UTC-5, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Possibly, Bill. I'm going to see how I like riding the 36 front/36 rear 
> and staying mostly in the middle front cog. To just the middle cog to a 40 
> means I lose that most often in the middle cog capability and I end up with 
> the same issue I have now of often shifting between low and middle. I'm 
> thinking the 2-36 cassette all was me to do what Steve suggested as an 
> initial response to my question.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:22:36 AM UTC-6, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>> I think that 12-36 with a 26/40/chainguard in front would be perfect for 
>> you, Deacon
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:10:06 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks, Shoji. As I play with this more, It makes sense to me to take 
>>> things one step at a time. I am thinking:
>>>
>>> -- update cassette to 9-speed 12-36. This will allow me to ride most all 
>>> the time in my middle chainring with my current 24/36/46 front chain rings. 
>>> (You are right, I almost never use my 46). But that will be a huge 
>>> improvement over currently having to shift all the time from small to 
>>> middle front cogs on the steep rolling terrain. (my small rear cog needs 
>>> replacing anyway, and I just confirmed with Riv that going to 9 speed from 
>>> 8 is easy.
>>>
>>> -- Based on what I learn riding that, I can explore other options.
>>>
>>> Sorry, HunqRider, for hijacking your thread. Your experience got my own 
>>> brain cogs working -- always a dangerous thing! Grin.
>>>
>>> With abandon,
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:25:06 AM UTC-6, Shoji Takahashi wrote:

 Hi Patrick,
 I read through the thread, and I hope I understand what you're trying 
 to do:
 "The riding I do is mostly in the 24..."-- Is the 24T adequate? Is it 
 too high or too low for your 8-spd 11-32 cassette? Do you spend your time 
 mainly on the 11 or mainly on the 32 or in the middle (or maybe the 
 terrain 
 rolls so much that you shift through the entire cassette?).

 Then you write "but then there are sections of flat and down where 
 pedaling is needed at higher speeds."-- is this mainly in the 36T middle 
 ring? (You mentioned that the 46T doesn't get much use.) Does the 36T with 
 the 8-spd 11-32 offer a good range for your needs? On  those flats, do you 
 spend a lot of time on the 11 and could use a larger front ring? 

 If you got the standard Riv build, I'm guessing that you could switch 
 from 8 to 9 without much pain. But, the IRD/Riv 8-spd is 12-34 and may 
 just 
 do the trick for you (compared to the 9-sp 12-36). Would the 36 rear serve 
 you better than 34? Perhaps you could use a little more top end 11 vs 12 
 (8-spd 11-32 cassette)? 

 Since it sounds like you're interested in changing the chainrings, 
 would 40/24 be better than 36/24 (essentially the current state)? Maybe 
 you'd be better served with something a little higher? 42/26? It would 
 depend on what gears you use most.

 Good luck!
 Shoji


 On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:28:26 AM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> I found expander sprocket for a 10-speed cassette: 
> http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/hope-t-rex-expander-sprocket/rp-prod119003which
>  then gives an 11-40 range. Will a 10-speed cassette require different 
> shifters, derailure, etc?
>
> RIv. sells the 9-speed cassette (for $50) that is 12-36. Does moving 
> to a 9 from an 8 require a change in drivetrain parts, or is it 
> interchangeable (I know I'd need a new chain). Anyone know of an expander 
> sprocket for 9-speed?
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Jim Bronson]

I put the 12-36 on the tandem and we ride it 95% in the 40 middle ring.

Since you're riding offroad, I would think the 36-36 combo would be plenty
low for most situations.  If you have a gnarly grade to climb, then flog
your granny ;)

I did have to change the derailer to work with the 36 btw.  I had some sort
of Suntour long cage previously.  I first tried a M-592 Shadow type Deore
but that didn't work on the derailer hanger the tandem has.  It did work
with the M-591 non-shadow derailer and it shifts good with the Microshift
brifters I have on the tandem.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Deacon Patrick  wrote:

> Possibly, Bill. I'm going to see how I like riding the 36 front/36 rear
> and staying mostly in the middle front cog. To just the middle cog to a 40
> means I lose that most often in the middle cog capability and I end up with
> the same issue I have now of often shifting between low and middle. I'm
> thinking the 2-36 cassette all was me to do what Steve suggested as an
> initial response to my question.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:22:36 AM UTC-6, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>>
>> I think that 12-36 with a 26/40/chainguard in front would be perfect for
>> you, Deacon
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:10:06 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks, Shoji. As I play with this more, It makes sense to me to take
>>> things one step at a time. I am thinking:
>>>
>>> -- update cassette to 9-speed 12-36. This will allow me to ride most all
>>> the time in my middle chainring with my current 24/36/46 front chain rings.
>>> (You are right, I almost never use my 46). But that will be a huge
>>> improvement over currently having to shift all the time from small to
>>> middle front cogs on the steep rolling terrain. (my small rear cog needs
>>> replacing anyway, and I just confirmed with Riv that going to 9 speed from
>>> 8 is easy.
>>>
>>> -- Based on what I learn riding that, I can explore other options.
>>>
>>> Sorry, HunqRider, for hijacking your thread. Your experience got my own
>>> brain cogs working -- always a dangerous thing! Grin.
>>>
>>> With abandon,
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:25:06 AM UTC-6, Shoji Takahashi wrote:

 Hi Patrick,
 I read through the thread, and I hope I understand what you're trying
 to do:
 "The riding I do is mostly in the 24..."-- Is the 24T adequate? Is it
 too high or too low for your 8-spd 11-32 cassette? Do you spend your time
 mainly on the 11 or mainly on the 32 or in the middle (or maybe the terrain
 rolls so much that you shift through the entire cassette?).

 Then you write "but then there are sections of flat and down where
 pedaling is needed at higher speeds."-- is this mainly in the 36T middle
 ring? (You mentioned that the 46T doesn't get much use.) Does the 36T with
 the 8-spd 11-32 offer a good range for your needs? On  those flats, do you
 spend a lot of time on the 11 and could use a larger front ring?

 If you got the standard Riv build, I'm guessing that you could switch
 from 8 to 9 without much pain. But, the IRD/Riv 8-spd is 12-34 and may just
 do the trick for you (compared to the 9-sp 12-36). Would the 36 rear serve
 you better than 34? Perhaps you could use a little more top end 11 vs 12
 (8-spd 11-32 cassette)?

 Since it sounds like you're interested in changing the chainrings,
 would 40/24 be better than 36/24 (essentially the current state)? Maybe
 you'd be better served with something a little higher? 42/26? It would
 depend on what gears you use most.

 Good luck!
 Shoji


 On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:28:26 AM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> I found expander sprocket for a 10-speed cassette: http://www.
> chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/hope-t-rex-expander-sprocket/
> rp-prod119003 which then gives an 11-40 range. Will a 10-speed
> cassette require different shifters, derailure, etc?
>
> RIv. sells the 9-speed cassette (for $50) that is 12-36. Does moving
> to a 9 from an 8 require a change in drivetrain parts, or is it
> interchangeable (I know I'd need a new chain). Anyone know of an expander
> sprocket for 9-speed?
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Keep the metal side up and the rubber side down!

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving em

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Montclair BobbyB]

Sorry, but I'm just not getting (or buying into) this 1x fad... AND I 
believe chain line is really important and cross-chaining IS bad, despite 
what some claim about their ridiculous 1x11 setups.  Someone please 
convince me otherwise.  WHAT is so awful about a front derailleur and a 
triple chain ring??? It provides all the gear range one could ever want, 
and enables maintaining a straighter chain line (no extreme 
cross-chaining!!)... The very thought of using the full range of rear cogs 
on a single front chain ring makes me cringe.  Now, perhaps a 1x3 (using 
only 3 centered cogs in the rear) makes more sense (but then you'd have 
only a 3 speed).  I like my 21 speeds, thank you.

I can almost understand if you're a racer, and front mis-shifts have cost 
you valuable time; then I suppose losing the front shifter may be worth the 
tradeoff.  Otherwise, I ain't gettin it...  That said, please feel free to 
send me your unwanted front derailleurs... 

Peace,

Bobby (feelin grinchy) Birmingham

On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:
>
> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to a 
> simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>
>  
>
> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
> thinking about making the change.
>
>  
>
> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>
> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>
> 113mm Bottom bracket
>
> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>
> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>
> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>
>  
>
> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just take 
> off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar thickness.  
> There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring bolts were too 
> long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones that were designed 
> for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem Solvers”; these ended 
> up working fine, though I ended up having to use the old longer crankset 
> “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>
>  
>
> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>
>  
>
> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just a bit 
> further away from the chain.  This has worked great; no rubbing, and no 
> drops of the chain under any conditions so far.
>
>  
>
> Can you just leave the front derailler in place, instead of messing round 
> with these chain protectors?  Probably, but then you would have still have 
> to be ‘trimming’ the derailler using your left hand to prevent rubbing.  In 
> my setup, the left hand does nothing except braking now.
>
>  
>
> One other thing I did was take a few links out of the chain, since it 
> never leaves the 34t chainring (it used to have to be long enough to 
> accommodate the 48t chainring).
>
>  
>
> The experience has been fun, I don’t see myself returning to a 
> multi-chainring setup anytime soon. In my smallest gearing (34t chainring & 
> 32t cog), it is doable to climb most hills, and in my top gearing (12t 
> cog), it is fast enough for all the flats and moderate descents.  On steep 
> descents, I do find that it will “spin out”, but that usually just tells me 
> that I’m going fast enough for my own safety, no need t

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[RoadieRyan]

Converted my Handsome Devil from a Sugino XD triple to a compact double to 
finally a single chain ring 1x9 set up 36t chain ring and 12-36t 9 speed 
cassette.  The gear inch range from 27.2 to 81.5 works well for hilly West 
Seattle and I have had so few issues with chain drops that the Paul chain 
keeper I bought for this set-up has never been mounted.  It probably helps 
that I am not pushing this bike to the limit, I am seldom out of the 
saddle, or doing rapid shifts, on the other hand I am not babying it 
either.   Love the simplicity of the 1x9 set up and don't see ever using a 
triple again, the closest I will get would be a 40x26t set up that Riv 
sells.

my .02 cents

On Monday, February 24, 2014 3:38:55 PM UTC-8, HunqRider wrote:
>
> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to a 
> simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>
>  
>
> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
> thinking about making the change.
>
>  
>
> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>
> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>
> 113mm Bottom bracket
>
> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>
> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>
> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>
>  
>
> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just take 
> off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar thickness.  
> There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring bolts were too 
> long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones that were designed 
> for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem Solvers”; these ended 
> up working fine, though I ended up having to use the old longer crankset 
> “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>
>  
>
> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>
>  
>
> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just a bit 
> further away from the chain.  This has worked great; no rubbing, and no 
> drops of the chain under any conditions so far.
>
>  
>
> Can you just leave the front derailler in place, instead of messing round 
> with these chain protectors?  Probably, but then you would have still have 
> to be ‘trimming’ the derailler using your left hand to prevent rubbing.  In 
> my setup, the left hand does nothing except braking now.
>
>  
>
> One other thing I did was take a few links out of the chain, since it 
> never leaves the 34t chainring (it used to have to be long enough to 
> accommodate the 48t chainring).
>
>  
>
> The experience has been fun, I don’t see myself returning to a 
> multi-chainring setup anytime soon. In my smallest gearing (34t chainring & 
> 32t cog), it is doable to climb most hills, and in my top gearing (12t 
> cog), it is fast enough for all the flats and moderate descents.  On steep 
> descents, I do find that it will “spin out”, but that usually just tells me 
> that I’m going fast enough for my own safety, no need to go faster by 
> pedaling.
>
>  
>
> I hope that this is helpful to anyone thinking about making the switch to 
> 1x this year.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-o

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Possibly, Bill. I'm going to see how I like riding the 36 front/36 rear and 
staying mostly in the middle front cog. To just the middle cog to a 40 
means I lose that most often in the middle cog capability and I end up with 
the same issue I have now of often shifting between low and middle. I'm 
thinking the 2-36 cassette all was me to do what Steve suggested as an 
initial response to my question.

With abandon,
Patrick

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:22:36 AM UTC-6, Bill Lindsay wrote:
>
> I think that 12-36 with a 26/40/chainguard in front would be perfect for 
> you, Deacon
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:10:06 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, Shoji. As I play with this more, It makes sense to me to take 
>> things one step at a time. I am thinking:
>>
>> -- update cassette to 9-speed 12-36. This will allow me to ride most all 
>> the time in my middle chainring with my current 24/36/46 front chain rings. 
>> (You are right, I almost never use my 46). But that will be a huge 
>> improvement over currently having to shift all the time from small to 
>> middle front cogs on the steep rolling terrain. (my small rear cog needs 
>> replacing anyway, and I just confirmed with Riv that going to 9 speed from 
>> 8 is easy.
>>
>> -- Based on what I learn riding that, I can explore other options.
>>
>> Sorry, HunqRider, for hijacking your thread. Your experience got my own 
>> brain cogs working -- always a dangerous thing! Grin.
>>
>> With abandon,
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:25:06 AM UTC-6, Shoji Takahashi wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Patrick,
>>> I read through the thread, and I hope I understand what you're trying to 
>>> do:
>>> "The riding I do is mostly in the 24..."-- Is the 24T adequate? Is it 
>>> too high or too low for your 8-spd 11-32 cassette? Do you spend your time 
>>> mainly on the 11 or mainly on the 32 or in the middle (or maybe the terrain 
>>> rolls so much that you shift through the entire cassette?).
>>>
>>> Then you write "but then there are sections of flat and down where 
>>> pedaling is needed at higher speeds."-- is this mainly in the 36T middle 
>>> ring? (You mentioned that the 46T doesn't get much use.) Does the 36T with 
>>> the 8-spd 11-32 offer a good range for your needs? On  those flats, do you 
>>> spend a lot of time on the 11 and could use a larger front ring? 
>>>
>>> If you got the standard Riv build, I'm guessing that you could switch 
>>> from 8 to 9 without much pain. But, the IRD/Riv 8-spd is 12-34 and may just 
>>> do the trick for you (compared to the 9-sp 12-36). Would the 36 rear serve 
>>> you better than 34? Perhaps you could use a little more top end 11 vs 12 
>>> (8-spd 11-32 cassette)? 
>>>
>>> Since it sounds like you're interested in changing the chainrings, would 
>>> 40/24 be better than 36/24 (essentially the current state)? Maybe you'd be 
>>> better served with something a little higher? 42/26? It would depend on 
>>> what gears you use most.
>>>
>>> Good luck!
>>> Shoji
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:28:26 AM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:

 I found expander sprocket for a 10-speed cassette: 
 http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/hope-t-rex-expander-sprocket/rp-prod119003which
  then gives an 11-40 range. Will a 10-speed cassette require different 
 shifters, derailure, etc?

 RIv. sells the 9-speed cassette (for $50) that is 12-36. Does moving to 
 a 9 from an 8 require a change in drivetrain parts, or is it 
 interchangeable (I know I'd need a new chain). Anyone know of an expander 
 sprocket for 9-speed?

 With abandon,
 Patrick



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Bill Lindsay]

I think that 12-36 with a 26/40/chainguard in front would be perfect for 
you, Deacon

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 10:10:06 AM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Thanks, Shoji. As I play with this more, It makes sense to me to take 
> things one step at a time. I am thinking:
>
> -- update cassette to 9-speed 12-36. This will allow me to ride most all 
> the time in my middle chainring with my current 24/36/46 front chain rings. 
> (You are right, I almost never use my 46). But that will be a huge 
> improvement over currently having to shift all the time from small to 
> middle front cogs on the steep rolling terrain. (my small rear cog needs 
> replacing anyway, and I just confirmed with Riv that going to 9 speed from 
> 8 is easy.
>
> -- Based on what I learn riding that, I can explore other options.
>
> Sorry, HunqRider, for hijacking your thread. Your experience got my own 
> brain cogs working -- always a dangerous thing! Grin.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:25:06 AM UTC-6, Shoji Takahashi wrote:
>>
>> Hi Patrick,
>> I read through the thread, and I hope I understand what you're trying to 
>> do:
>> "The riding I do is mostly in the 24..."-- Is the 24T adequate? Is it too 
>> high or too low for your 8-spd 11-32 cassette? Do you spend your time 
>> mainly on the 11 or mainly on the 32 or in the middle (or maybe the terrain 
>> rolls so much that you shift through the entire cassette?).
>>
>> Then you write "but then there are sections of flat and down where 
>> pedaling is needed at higher speeds."-- is this mainly in the 36T middle 
>> ring? (You mentioned that the 46T doesn't get much use.) Does the 36T with 
>> the 8-spd 11-32 offer a good range for your needs? On  those flats, do you 
>> spend a lot of time on the 11 and could use a larger front ring? 
>>
>> If you got the standard Riv build, I'm guessing that you could switch 
>> from 8 to 9 without much pain. But, the IRD/Riv 8-spd is 12-34 and may just 
>> do the trick for you (compared to the 9-sp 12-36). Would the 36 rear serve 
>> you better than 34? Perhaps you could use a little more top end 11 vs 12 
>> (8-spd 11-32 cassette)? 
>>
>> Since it sounds like you're interested in changing the chainrings, would 
>> 40/24 be better than 36/24 (essentially the current state)? Maybe you'd be 
>> better served with something a little higher? 42/26? It would depend on 
>> what gears you use most.
>>
>> Good luck!
>> Shoji
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:28:26 AM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>>
>>> I found expander sprocket for a 10-speed cassette: 
>>> http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/hope-t-rex-expander-sprocket/rp-prod119003which
>>>  then gives an 11-40 range. Will a 10-speed cassette require different 
>>> shifters, derailure, etc?
>>>
>>> RIv. sells the 9-speed cassette (for $50) that is 12-36. Does moving to 
>>> a 9 from an 8 require a change in drivetrain parts, or is it 
>>> interchangeable (I know I'd need a new chain). Anyone know of an expander 
>>> sprocket for 9-speed?
>>>
>>> With abandon,
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Thanks, Shoji. As I play with this more, It makes sense to me to take 
things one step at a time. I am thinking:

-- update cassette to 9-speed 12-36. This will allow me to ride most all 
the time in my middle chainring with my current 24/36/46 front chain rings. 
(You are right, I almost never use my 46). But that will be a huge 
improvement over currently having to shift all the time from small to 
middle front cogs on the steep rolling terrain. (my small rear cog needs 
replacing anyway, and I just confirmed with Riv that going to 9 speed from 
8 is easy.

-- Based on what I learn riding that, I can explore other options.

Sorry, HunqRider, for hijacking your thread. Your experience got my own 
brain cogs working -- always a dangerous thing! Grin.

With abandon,
Patrick

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:25:06 AM UTC-6, Shoji Takahashi wrote:
>
> Hi Patrick,
> I read through the thread, and I hope I understand what you're trying to 
> do:
> "The riding I do is mostly in the 24..."-- Is the 24T adequate? Is it too 
> high or too low for your 8-spd 11-32 cassette? Do you spend your time 
> mainly on the 11 or mainly on the 32 or in the middle (or maybe the terrain 
> rolls so much that you shift through the entire cassette?).
>
> Then you write "but then there are sections of flat and down where 
> pedaling is needed at higher speeds."-- is this mainly in the 36T middle 
> ring? (You mentioned that the 46T doesn't get much use.) Does the 36T with 
> the 8-spd 11-32 offer a good range for your needs? On  those flats, do you 
> spend a lot of time on the 11 and could use a larger front ring? 
>
> If you got the standard Riv build, I'm guessing that you could switch from 
> 8 to 9 without much pain. But, the IRD/Riv 8-spd is 12-34 and may just do 
> the trick for you (compared to the 9-sp 12-36). Would the 36 rear serve you 
> better than 34? Perhaps you could use a little more top end 11 vs 12 (8-spd 
> 11-32 cassette)? 
>
> Since it sounds like you're interested in changing the chainrings, would 
> 40/24 be better than 36/24 (essentially the current state)? Maybe you'd be 
> better served with something a little higher? 42/26? It would depend on 
> what gears you use most.
>
> Good luck!
> Shoji
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:28:26 AM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>
>> I found expander sprocket for a 10-speed cassette: 
>> http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/hope-t-rex-expander-sprocket/rp-prod119003which
>>  then gives an 11-40 range. Will a 10-speed cassette require different 
>> shifters, derailure, etc?
>>
>> RIv. sells the 9-speed cassette (for $50) that is 12-36. Does moving to a 
>> 9 from an 8 require a change in drivetrain parts, or is it interchangeable 
>> (I know I'd need a new chain). Anyone know of an expander sprocket for 
>> 9-speed?
>>
>> With abandon,
>> Patrick
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Shoji Takahashi]

Hi Patrick,
I read through the thread, and I hope I understand what you're trying to do:
"The riding I do is mostly in the 24..."-- Is the 24T adequate? Is it too 
high or too low for your 8-spd 11-32 cassette? Do you spend your time 
mainly on the 11 or mainly on the 32 or in the middle (or maybe the terrain 
rolls so much that you shift through the entire cassette?).

Then you write "but then there are sections of flat and down where pedaling 
is needed at higher speeds."-- is this mainly in the 36T middle ring? (You 
mentioned that the 46T doesn't get much use.) Does the 36T with the 8-spd 
11-32 offer a good range for your needs? On  those flats, do you spend a 
lot of time on the 11 and could use a larger front ring? 

If you got the standard Riv build, I'm guessing that you could switch from 
8 to 9 without much pain. But, the IRD/Riv 8-spd is 12-34 and may just do 
the trick for you (compared to the 9-sp 12-36). Would the 36 rear serve you 
better than 34? Perhaps you could use a little more top end 11 vs 12 (8-spd 
11-32 cassette)? 

Since it sounds like you're interested in changing the chainrings, would 
40/24 be better than 36/24 (essentially the current state)? Maybe you'd be 
better served with something a little higher? 42/26? It would depend on 
what gears you use most.

Good luck!
Shoji


On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:28:26 AM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> I found expander sprocket for a 10-speed cassette: 
> http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/hope-t-rex-expander-sprocket/rp-prod119003which
>  then gives an 11-40 range. Will a 10-speed cassette require different 
> shifters, derailure, etc?
>
> RIv. sells the 9-speed cassette (for $50) that is 12-36. Does moving to a 
> 9 from an 8 require a change in drivetrain parts, or is it interchangeable 
> (I know I'd need a new chain). Anyone know of an expander sprocket for 
> 9-speed?
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

I found expander sprocket for a 10-speed 
cassette: 
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/us/en/hope-t-rex-expander-sprocket/rp-prod119003
 
which then gives an 11-40 range. Will a 10-speed cassette require different 
shifters, derailure, etc?

RIv. sells the 9-speed cassette (for $50) that is 12-36. Does moving to a 9 
from an 8 require a change in drivetrain parts, or is it interchangeable (I 
know I'd need a new chain). Anyone know of an expander sprocket for 9-speed?

With abandon,
Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Ok. So I'm now caught up. I understand the cost and how to shift to a 
double 40-24. What range could I get if I wanted to go single ring front 
and change the cassette (currently an 8 speed 11-32), without changing 
shifters to get the maximum range out of a 24 or 26 ring up front? I have 
Silver SOS thumb shifters. Can they handle a 10 speed cassette?

With abandon,
Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Jay in Tel Aviv]

Patrick,

I changed my 26/36/46 to 26/40/bashguard last year. It was easy to do and I 
couldn't be happier with it. All that was required was to remove the middle 
and outer chainrings and install the new ones. No messing around with BB, 
FD or anything else.

In fact, I liked not shifting in front so much that I went to a single cog 
in back too. Sounds like that wouldn't work for the terrrain you ride in 
though.

Jay

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 4:11:34 AM UTC+2, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> On 03/24/2014 09:53 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote: 
> > Except for the price tag, the 11x1 drivetrains sure look attractive. 
> > 
>
> However, chain angularity doesn't look too good for such drivetrains; 
> what's more, the range isn't as good as you can get with two chain rings. 
>
> Honestly, it's not like chain ring shifts are all that hard. 
>
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Steve Palincsar]

On 03/24/2014 07:53 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote:
Thanks, Steve. Maybe I'm using "cross over" incorrectly. I mean the 
issue where you don't want to use your small gears when you're in your 
small front ring and vice-versa for the big cog. I'm fine with 
shifting down or up five gears when I shift the front one.


"Crossing over" means shifting from one chain ring to the other. Small 
front/small rear and large front/large rear combinations are what's 
known as "cross chaining".  You definitely want to avoid cross 
chaining.  Not only does the chain run at an extreme angle, which 
exacerbates wear, but often the chain can contact the other chain ring.  
One big reason for having two chain rings is so that you can avoid 
extreme angles; another is that you can extend the range and have higher 
high and lower low gears than you can on a single chain ring.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Steve Palincsar]

On 03/24/2014 09:12 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote:
Thanks, Dave. Would you mind elaborating on what you love about the 
wide range double? I realize we ride different surfaces and terrain, 
but I am trying to understand the experiential difference. Can I use 
all the gears in each?


No, you do not want to use the big front/big rear and small front/small 
rear combinations.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Steve Palincsar]

On 03/24/2014 09:53 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote:

Except for the price tag, the 11x1 drivetrains sure look attractive.



However, chain angularity doesn't look too good for such drivetrains; 
what's more, the range isn't as good as you can get with two chain rings.


Honestly, it's not like chain ring shifts are all that hard.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Except for the price tag, the 11x1 drivetrains sure look attractive. Thank 
you all for helping me explore the pros and cons of a wide range double.

With abandon,
Patrick

On Monday, March 24, 2014 7:15:47 PM UTC-6, dougP wrote:
>
> Patrick:
>
> In addition to Steve's mention of the wear factor on the 24, another good 
> reason to shift up as soon as you're over the top of a climb is to avoid 
> chain slap / fall-off.  It's easy to just shift up 2-3 cogs in back while 
> leaving the front on the granny.  The chain can be pretty slack under those 
> conditions, and a good bump can drop the chain off the granny.
>
> dougP
>
> On Monday, March 24, 2014 3:18:33 PM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>
>> Oh, I understand that about the triple. But I would prefer to get rid of 
>> the cross over. The riding I do is mostly in the 24, but then there are 
>> sections of flat and down where pedaling is needed at higher speeds. I'd 
>> prefer to simplify things. I spoke with Riv, and it's not too bad to shift 
>> things around to a 40-24 set up. I'm going to give that a go.
>>
>> With abandon,
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Monday, March 24, 2014 4:07:00 PM UTC-6, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/24/2014 05:30 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote: 
>>> > This intrigues me. I'm getting frustrated with the complexity of my 
>>> > triple, and essentially my big ring is my ring guard. I got lost in 
>>> > the technical jargon though. Could you please explain things to a 
>>> > dummy (because you would be. Grin.)? I currently have the  Sugino XD2 
>>> > Crank, Triple 46x36x24. and would love to drop the 46 and have someone 
>>> > a bit larger than the 36 for my big ring, plus a real ring guard. 
>>>
>>> Using a 24/36/46 triple is simplicity itself.  For riding on level to 
>>> slighly uphill terrain, stay on the 46.  When you run out of gears and 
>>> need to downshift (i.e., when you are on the next to largest rear 
>>> sprocket and need something still lower) shift to the 36.  You may need 
>>> to simultaneously upshift one or perhaps 2 in back if the gear you get 
>>> is too low, or you could just wait a few seconds to let inertia have its 
>>> way. 
>>> About the only time you'll need to think about the 24 is on grades over 
>>> 10%.  At that point, go to the granny, and possibly if the gear is too 
>>> low upshift one or perhaps 2 in back to get to a proper gear.   There's 
>>> nothing at all complex about that. 
>>>
>>> Some notes on the 24:  use it with the 3 or at most 4 largest 
>>> sprockets.  Anything beyond that and you're overlapping with the range 
>>> of the 36 and unless you can see there's even steeper terrain looming 
>>> ahead (making it desirable to stay on the granny) shift to the 36 and 
>>> downshift as necessary in back to get to the proper gear.  You don't 
>>> want to ride on the 24 any more than you need to, because wear is much 
>>> greater on the smaller chain ring than on the larger. 
>>>
>>> Likewise, if you are on the 36 and you find you are in any of the 3 
>>> smallest sprockets in back, upshift to the 46 and downshift one or two 
>>> in back to get back to the right gear. 
>>>
>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[dougP]

Patrick:

In addition to Steve's mention of the wear factor on the 24, another good 
reason to shift up as soon as you're over the top of a climb is to avoid 
chain slap / fall-off.  It's easy to just shift up 2-3 cogs in back while 
leaving the front on the granny.  The chain can be pretty slack under those 
conditions, and a good bump can drop the chain off the granny.

dougP

On Monday, March 24, 2014 3:18:33 PM UTC-7, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Oh, I understand that about the triple. But I would prefer to get rid of 
> the cross over. The riding I do is mostly in the 24, but then there are 
> sections of flat and down where pedaling is needed at higher speeds. I'd 
> prefer to simplify things. I spoke with Riv, and it's not too bad to shift 
> things around to a 40-24 set up. I'm going to give that a go.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> On Monday, March 24, 2014 4:07:00 PM UTC-6, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>>
>> On 03/24/2014 05:30 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote: 
>> > This intrigues me. I'm getting frustrated with the complexity of my 
>> > triple, and essentially my big ring is my ring guard. I got lost in 
>> > the technical jargon though. Could you please explain things to a 
>> > dummy (because you would be. Grin.)? I currently have the  Sugino XD2 
>> > Crank, Triple 46x36x24. and would love to drop the 46 and have someone 
>> > a bit larger than the 36 for my big ring, plus a real ring guard. 
>>
>> Using a 24/36/46 triple is simplicity itself.  For riding on level to 
>> slighly uphill terrain, stay on the 46.  When you run out of gears and 
>> need to downshift (i.e., when you are on the next to largest rear 
>> sprocket and need something still lower) shift to the 36.  You may need 
>> to simultaneously upshift one or perhaps 2 in back if the gear you get 
>> is too low, or you could just wait a few seconds to let inertia have its 
>> way. 
>> About the only time you'll need to think about the 24 is on grades over 
>> 10%.  At that point, go to the granny, and possibly if the gear is too 
>> low upshift one or perhaps 2 in back to get to a proper gear.   There's 
>> nothing at all complex about that. 
>>
>> Some notes on the 24:  use it with the 3 or at most 4 largest 
>> sprockets.  Anything beyond that and you're overlapping with the range 
>> of the 36 and unless you can see there's even steeper terrain looming 
>> ahead (making it desirable to stay on the granny) shift to the 36 and 
>> downshift as necessary in back to get to the proper gear.  You don't 
>> want to ride on the 24 any more than you need to, because wear is much 
>> greater on the smaller chain ring than on the larger. 
>>
>> Likewise, if you are on the 36 and you find you are in any of the 3 
>> smallest sprockets in back, upshift to the 46 and downshift one or two 
>> in back to get back to the right gear. 
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Thanks, Dave. Would you mind elaborating on what you love about the wide 
range double? I realize we ride different surfaces and terrain, but I am 
trying to understand the experiential difference. Can I use all the gears 
in each?

With abandon,
Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Dave Johnston]

Patrick, 
I can highly recommend a double using your Sugino crank and only the middle 
and inner positions.

I am using a BBG Guard-42t-28t on an old XTR 110/74 crank with a wide range 
11-34t on a Rawland rSogn (see picture) and another bike with a BBG-40t-26t 
on a Sugino XD2 crank as the drivetrain on a 650b commuter conversion and 
really like the result. I basically stay in the middle front ring 95% of 
the time, but I live in flat country where the hills are less than a 1/2 
mile long.

For the 42t I am using a ramped and pinned TA ring and on the 40t its a 
Sugino flat ring with no ramps. Both shift great with a friction downtube 
shifter.

The outer guard is made by BBG and the price is great on those.For a 
shifting setup I would go one size larger than they recommend. (aka get a 
44t guard for a 42t ring)

- Dave Johnston



On Monday, March 24, 2014 7:53:25 PM UTC-4, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Thanks, Steve. Maybe I'm using "cross over" incorrectly. I mean the issue 
> where you don't want to use your small gears when you're in your small 
> front ring and vice-versa for the big cog. I'm fine with shifting down or 
> up five gears when I shift the front one.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> On Monday, March 24, 2014 5:45:22 PM UTC-6, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>>
>> On 03/24/2014 06:18 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote: 
>> > Oh, I understand that about the triple. But I would prefer to get rid 
>> > of the cross over. The riding I do is mostly in the 24, but then there 
>> > are sections of flat and down where pedaling is needed at higher 
>> > speeds. I'd prefer to simplify things. I spoke with Riv, and it's not 
>> > too bad to shift things around to a 40-24 set up. I'm going to give 
>> > that a go. 
>>
>> Before you do, you might want to plot the gearing on Sheldon's gear 
>> chart.  Crossing over on a wide range double can be a real issue: unlike 
>> the one or two you need to adjust in back, with a wide range double you 
>> may have to shift 4 or 5 sprockets in back. 
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Thanks, Steve. Maybe I'm using "cross over" incorrectly. I mean the issue 
where you don't want to use your small gears when you're in your small 
front ring and vice-versa for the big cog. I'm fine with shifting down or 
up five gears when I shift the front one.

With abandon,
Patrick

On Monday, March 24, 2014 5:45:22 PM UTC-6, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> On 03/24/2014 06:18 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote: 
> > Oh, I understand that about the triple. But I would prefer to get rid 
> > of the cross over. The riding I do is mostly in the 24, but then there 
> > are sections of flat and down where pedaling is needed at higher 
> > speeds. I'd prefer to simplify things. I spoke with Riv, and it's not 
> > too bad to shift things around to a 40-24 set up. I'm going to give 
> > that a go. 
>
> Before you do, you might want to plot the gearing on Sheldon's gear 
> chart.  Crossing over on a wide range double can be a real issue: unlike 
> the one or two you need to adjust in back, with a wide range double you 
> may have to shift 4 or 5 sprockets in back. 
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Steve Palincsar]

On 03/24/2014 06:18 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote:
Oh, I understand that about the triple. But I would prefer to get rid 
of the cross over. The riding I do is mostly in the 24, but then there 
are sections of flat and down where pedaling is needed at higher 
speeds. I'd prefer to simplify things. I spoke with Riv, and it's not 
too bad to shift things around to a 40-24 set up. I'm going to give 
that a go.


Before you do, you might want to plot the gearing on Sheldon's gear 
chart.  Crossing over on a wide range double can be a real issue: unlike 
the one or two you need to adjust in back, with a wide range double you 
may have to shift 4 or 5 sprockets in back.



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

Oh, I understand that about the triple. But I would prefer to get rid of 
the cross over. The riding I do is mostly in the 24, but then there are 
sections of flat and down where pedaling is needed at higher speeds. I'd 
prefer to simplify things. I spoke with Riv, and it's not too bad to shift 
things around to a 40-24 set up. I'm going to give that a go.

With abandon,
Patrick

On Monday, March 24, 2014 4:07:00 PM UTC-6, Steve Palincsar wrote:
>
> On 03/24/2014 05:30 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote: 
> > This intrigues me. I'm getting frustrated with the complexity of my 
> > triple, and essentially my big ring is my ring guard. I got lost in 
> > the technical jargon though. Could you please explain things to a 
> > dummy (because you would be. Grin.)? I currently have the  Sugino XD2 
> > Crank, Triple 46x36x24. and would love to drop the 46 and have someone 
> > a bit larger than the 36 for my big ring, plus a real ring guard. 
>
> Using a 24/36/46 triple is simplicity itself.  For riding on level to 
> slighly uphill terrain, stay on the 46.  When you run out of gears and 
> need to downshift (i.e., when you are on the next to largest rear 
> sprocket and need something still lower) shift to the 36.  You may need 
> to simultaneously upshift one or perhaps 2 in back if the gear you get 
> is too low, or you could just wait a few seconds to let inertia have its 
> way. 
> About the only time you'll need to think about the 24 is on grades over 
> 10%.  At that point, go to the granny, and possibly if the gear is too 
> low upshift one or perhaps 2 in back to get to a proper gear.   There's 
> nothing at all complex about that. 
>
> Some notes on the 24:  use it with the 3 or at most 4 largest 
> sprockets.  Anything beyond that and you're overlapping with the range 
> of the 36 and unless you can see there's even steeper terrain looming 
> ahead (making it desirable to stay on the granny) shift to the 36 and 
> downshift as necessary in back to get to the proper gear.  You don't 
> want to ride on the 24 any more than you need to, because wear is much 
> greater on the smaller chain ring than on the larger. 
>
> Likewise, if you are on the 36 and you find you are in any of the 3 
> smallest sprockets in back, upshift to the 46 and downshift one or two 
> in back to get back to the right gear. 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Steve Palincsar]

On 03/24/2014 05:30 PM, Deacon Patrick wrote:
This intrigues me. I'm getting frustrated with the complexity of my 
triple, and essentially my big ring is my ring guard. I got lost in 
the technical jargon though. Could you please explain things to a 
dummy (because you would be. Grin.)? I currently have the  Sugino XD2 
Crank, Triple 46x36x24. and would love to drop the 46 and have someone 
a bit larger than the 36 for my big ring, plus a real ring guard.


Using a 24/36/46 triple is simplicity itself.  For riding on level to 
slighly uphill terrain, stay on the 46.  When you run out of gears and 
need to downshift (i.e., when you are on the next to largest rear 
sprocket and need something still lower) shift to the 36.  You may need 
to simultaneously upshift one or perhaps 2 in back if the gear you get 
is too low, or you could just wait a few seconds to let inertia have its 
way.
About the only time you'll need to think about the 24 is on grades over 
10%.  At that point, go to the granny, and possibly if the gear is too 
low upshift one or perhaps 2 in back to get to a proper gear.   There's 
nothing at all complex about that.


Some notes on the 24:  use it with the 3 or at most 4 largest 
sprockets.  Anything beyond that and you're overlapping with the range 
of the 36 and unless you can see there's even steeper terrain looming 
ahead (making it desirable to stay on the granny) shift to the 36 and 
downshift as necessary in back to get to the proper gear.  You don't 
want to ride on the 24 any more than you need to, because wear is much 
greater on the smaller chain ring than on the larger.


Likewise, if you are on the 36 and you find you are in any of the 3 
smallest sprockets in back, upshift to the 46 and downshift one or two 
in back to get back to the right gear.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Tim Gavin]

Patrick:

Rivendell can help you with your cranky desires.   :)

Ring guard .

Chainrings in 40t , or in 43
and 45 .

If you change your triple to a double + ring guard, then you should tighten
the "H" screw on your front derailer to limit its range to the two chain
rings.

Cheers,
Tim Gavin
Cedar Rapids, IA  USA


On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Deacon Patrick  wrote:

> This intrigues me. I'm getting frustrated with the complexity of my
> triple, and essentially my big ring is my ring guard. I got lost in the
> technical jargon though. Could you please explain things to a dummy
> (because you would be. Grin.)? I currently have the  Sugino XD2 Crank,
> Triple 46x36x24. and would love to drop the 46 and have someone a bit
> larger than the 36 for my big ring, plus a real ring guard.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Matthew J]

Most gears I have are 1x5.  Could not be happier.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Deacon Patrick]

This intrigues me. I'm getting frustrated with the complexity of my triple, 
and essentially my big ring is my ring guard. I got lost in the technical 
jargon though. Could you please explain things to a dummy (because you 
would be. Grin.)? I currently have the  Sugino XD2 Crank, Triple 46x36x24. 
and would love to drop the 46 and have someone a bit larger than the 36 for 
my big ring, plus a real ring guard.

With abandon,
Patrick

On Monday, February 24, 2014 4:38:55 PM UTC-7, HunqRider wrote:
>
> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to a 
> simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>
>  
>
> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
> thinking about making the change.
>
>  
>
> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>
> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>
> 113mm Bottom bracket
>
> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>
> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>
> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>
>  
>
> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just take 
> off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar thickness.  
> There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring bolts were too 
> long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones that were designed 
> for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem Solvers”; these ended 
> up working fine, though I ended up having to use the old longer crankset 
> “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>
>  
>
> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>
>  
>
> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just a bit 
> further away from the chain.  This has worked great; no rubbing, and no 
> drops of the chain under any conditions so far.
>
>  
>
> Can you just leave the front derailler in place, instead of messing round 
> with these chain protectors?  Probably, but then you would have still have 
> to be ‘trimming’ the derailler using your left hand to prevent rubbing.  In 
> my setup, the left hand does nothing except braking now.
>
>  
>
> One other thing I did was take a few links out of the chain, since it 
> never leaves the 34t chainring (it used to have to be long enough to 
> accommodate the 48t chainring).
>
>  
>
> The experience has been fun, I don’t see myself returning to a 
> multi-chainring setup anytime soon. In my smallest gearing (34t chainring & 
> 32t cog), it is doable to climb most hills, and in my top gearing (12t 
> cog), it is fast enough for all the flats and moderate descents.  On steep 
> descents, I do find that it will “spin out”, but that usually just tells me 
> that I’m going fast enough for my own safety, no need to go faster by 
> pedaling.
>
>  
>
> I hope that this is helpful to anyone thinking about making the switch to 
> 1x this year.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[blakcloud]

When I was at NAHBS SRAM was showing off their new 1 X 11 cyclocross group 
set. It looks very promising. Now if I could get a thumb shifter with this 
set up it might work really well for me. 


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Philip Williamson]

I was looking at these, too. Apparently the thick/thin chainrings are the 
new thing. I could go with a 1x9 for a bike... 

Philip
www.biketinker.com

On Sunday, March 23, 2014 4:52:31 PM UTC-7, Sine Wave wrote:
>
> Check out the Wolf Tooth chainrings; they're designed specifically to work 
> with 1xX drive trains and supposedly obviate the need for any sort of chain 
> keeper. I haven't used one but I am planning on on getting one. And they 
> make them for 110bcd cranks. Also, the shimano shadow plus RD would be 
> worth looking into. You would have to go with a 10 speed setup for that 
> though I think. But you would gain more ratios for the bottom and top end. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[HunqRider]

Jon,
Thanks for the advice!  I did not know about that tension adjustment hole 
in the rear derailler.  My setup is dialed in perfectly right now, but if 
the chain gets slack over time, it's nice to know that I can adjust the RD 
spring tension instead of messing with the chain length.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[RBW] Re: Single-Chainring Drivetrains

[Jon Doyle]

To get more tension from the RD and fewer chain drops try adjusting the 
RD's spring. See step 
7: http://www.parktool.com/blog/repair-help/rear-derailleur-overhaul

Jon
Watertown, MA

On Monday, February 24, 2014 6:38:55 PM UTC-5, HunqRider wrote:
>
> Wondering if anyone is thinking about converting their Rivendell over to a 
> simple 1x drivetrain configuration (single chainring).  I did this last 
> year, and it has made riding a whole lot simpler and fun.  
>
>  
>
> I will detail my experiences, which hopefully will be useful to others 
> thinking about making the change.
>
>  
>
> My original drivetrain configuration was:
>
> Hunqapillar (54 cm frame)
>
> 113mm Bottom bracket
>
> Sugino XD2 crankset (double)
>
> 34 and 48 tooth chainrings
>
> 8-speed cassette (12-32 tooth)
>
>  
>
> To make the change over to the 1x drivetrain, I figured I would just take 
> off the outer chainring and replace with 5 washers of similar thickness.  
> There was a problem though; the “nut” part of the chainring bolts were too 
> long, so had to get some shorter ones.  My LBS sold ones that were designed 
> for single speed cranks from a company named “Problem Solvers”; these ended 
> up working fine, though I ended up having to use the old longer crankset 
> “bolts” with my new shorter “nuts”.  
>
>  
>
> I took off the front derailer, and went out on a few rides.  Everything 
> was fine, except that when doing fast shifts over to the small cassette 
> cogs, the chain would sometimes fall off the chainring to the outside.  So 
> I installed a Paul Components Chain Keeper.  This device mounts onto the 
> seat tube where the front derailler would normally be, and it covers both 
> the inside and outside of the chain. This worked only ‘OK’ for me.  I 
> believe that it is designed for 9- or 10-speed chain thicknesses, so my 
> 8-speed chain was a tight fit.  I had to play with it a lot to get it in 
> the perfect position, and even then, it would slightly rub on the chain, 
> especially when riding hard “out of the saddle” which would create 
> chainring flex.  So I had to find a new solution.
>
>  
>
> My new solution was to cover both sides of the chain independently.  For 
> the inside, I used an N-Gear Jump Stop.  I haven’t ever had any issues with 
> the chain falling off to the inside, but the Jump Stop gives me piece of 
> mind.  For the outside, I installed a bashguard.  I don’t think that just 
> any bashguard will do, it needs to be as thin and small as possible.  
> Here’s why:  I never changed my bottom bracket, so the chainring is not 
> perfectly centered on the cassette cogs.  Ideally, I probably should have 
> installed a slightly longer bottom bracket to get better chainline, but in 
> my setup, when “cross-chained” from the 34t chainring to the small 12t cog, 
> the chain has a bit of an angle, and a big bashguard would rub.  So I put 
> on a ‘SuperLight’ Bashguard from BBG bashguards, size 36 (just slightly 
> bigger than the chainring).  This bashguard is half the thickness of a 
> chainring.  I then used washers inside the bashguard, to get it just a bit 
> further away from the chain.  This has worked great; no rubbing, and no 
> drops of the chain under any conditions so far.
>
>  
>
> Can you just leave the front derailler in place, instead of messing round 
> with these chain protectors?  Probably, but then you would have still have 
> to be ‘trimming’ the derailler using your left hand to prevent rubbing.  In 
> my setup, the left hand does nothing except braking now.
>
>  
>
> One other thing I did was take a few links out of the chain, since it 
> never leaves the 34t chainring (it used to have to be long enough to 
> accommodate the 48t chainring).
>
>  
>
> The experience has been fun, I don’t see myself returning to a 
> multi-chainring setup anytime soon. In my smallest gearing (34t chainring & 
> 32t cog), it is doable to climb most hills, and in my top gearing (12t 
> cog), it is fast enough for all the flats and moderate descents.  On steep 
> descents, I do find that it will “spin out”, but that usually just tells me 
> that I’m going fast enough for my own safety, no need to go faster by 
> pedaling.
>
>  
>
> I hope that this is helpful to anyone thinking about making the switch to 
> 1x this year.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.