[Closed] Single-ring 'Bullying'

Not enough random capitalisation and one really weak swear word.

2/10 or should that be 2 x 10?

Just ignore them, they're mostly harmless.

Journalist in hyperbole shocker 😉

I'm with you on this, and that's despite three out of my four bikes having a single chainring, it really doesn't matter.

I'd love to see them getting up some proper hills on a single, well, unless running a 40/42 on the rear. Simple fact is, not all of us can or will afford the £60 cassettes etc. I think i could get up most stuff on a 42 rear, but as i say, it means then shelling out for a potential pile of new bits which could run into the hundreds £££

Alright Grandad calm down!

I consider myself superior for bucking the single chainring trend. Well, that, and mechanically/technically incompetent.

weeksy - Member
I'd love to see them getting up some proper hills on a single, well, unless running a 40/42 on the rear. Simple fact is, not all of us can or will afford the £60 cassettes etc. I think i could get up most stuff on a 42 rear, but as i say, it means then shelling out for a potential pile of new bits which could run into the hundreds £££

40 or 42? None of them will be running that. They'll all be on 12spd 50t.

It's not exactly new. Off the top of my head, we've had the same thing with riser bars, bar widths, stem lengths, droppers etc. etc.

I remember MBR telling me in 2002 that fingerless gloves were no good, and you had to have full-finger gloves as 'MTB has more in common with MX than road cycling'. Eh?

It's just rubbish. You have to remember that magazines are only viable because of marketing. It's important for them to create a sense of redundancy and inadequacy around 'old' kit.

n.b. new kit likely to be better than old kit, progress a real thing etc and basically it's all just a mindless but very enjoyable waste of time and money

40 or 42? None of them will be running that. They'll all be on 12spd 50t.

What's that coming in at price wise to jump from 10 speed? £400 ? £500 ? new wheel/hub ? cranks, cassette, chain, shifter, mech....

I get the op's argument (don't necessarily agree), but you're right if you're riding and happy then all is good.

I don't get the subsequent posts

I'd love to see them getting up some proper hills on a single, well, unless running a 40/42 on the rear.

That's the point isn't it, buy a wider range cassette so you can get up the hills.

Just had a look at the Evans website - £44 for XT 10 speed cassette vs £60 for 11 speed.

£44 for XT 10 speed cassette vs £60 for 11 speed.

That's assuming you have the rest of the bits, it's not just the cassette you need.

rammymtb earlier today....

[img] [/img]

FWIW, I find the oneby a great solution. Much neater and leaves space for the dropper lever.

I ride in the alps much of the time and haven't had a problem getting up the hills/mountains.

Off-road I'm running out of puff/grip/determination before I run out of gears.

Never worried about caning it down on tarmac.

@OP

Bike journalism is really all about pushing the next big thing. It's easy to see why, manufacturer advertising keeps bike magazines in business which is why so few made a fuss about the constant influx of new standards as a way of making last year's bike suddenly obsolete.

As a consumer, the ultimate power rests with you. If you object to a particular manufacturer's endless and non-transferable new standards, then buy your components or complete bike from someone else. One particular manufacturer is at the top of my "don't buy from" list because of exactly this reason. Likewise, you may even stop buying a particular publication of the journalists hyperbole offends.

OP it's only bullying if you let it affect you

Fit that non-dropper seat post as well

[img] [/img]

I have a triple on a 9spd setup, and my dropper post is broken. So there.

It's easy to see why, manufacturer advertising keeps bike magazines in business which is why so few made a fuss about the constant influx of new standards as a way of making last year's bike suddenly obsolete

Sure, but old bikes are mostly horrible. Try riding something from 20 years ago with rim brakes, 2" elastomer forks, narrow bars, long stem, non-dropper seatpost.

Greg Callaghan and T-Mo both still use doubles in the EWS and seem to be managing OK with it. FWIW, I run Eagle and will never switch back, but it doesn't mean it's for everyone.

rammymtb - Member
I'm just about fed up with MTB journalists calling people stuff like 'dinosaurs' for not having a single chainring set up.

Me too.

There is a particular journo in this months ST that has referred to 'the 3 people left that don't yet have single a single chainring'.

Singletrack used to be different.
I lost an awful lot of respect for them when 650b was accepted without any kind of objective analysis of the pros and cons.
Likewise with pretty much every new standard since.

It's just rubbish. You have to remember that magazines are only viable because of marketing. It's important for them to create a sense of redundancy and inadequacy around 'old' kit.

Yup.

I tried a 1x11 for the first time ever on my mates new bike. I ran out of gears and really wanted a bigger front ring. I shan't be changing the triple set up on my bikes any time soon.

I consider myself superior for bucking the single chainring trend. Well, that, and mechanically/technically incompetent.

[img] [/img]

I tried a 1x11 for the first time ever on my mates new bike. I ran out of gears and really wanted a bigger front ring. I shan't be changing the triple set up on my bikes any time soon.

Swoon.

That rant in the OP reads very much like a letter in the MBR. You should try sending it in, you'll maybe win a prize.

I think if you're buying/building up a new bike then 1x makes a lot of sense. But the idea that you should scrap a perfectly good drivechain is obviously silly. I took one of my old bikes out with its positively prehistoric 3*8 setup at the weekend and could find anything not to like about it. 🙂

Perhaps I'm blind to it, but I don't see any kind of gear 'snobbery'. Quite the reverse when you look away from magazines and into forum land. Where you get the usual reverse snobbery and judgement if you spend the money on the latest kit such as eagle. I don't care what people are riding as long as they are out. Unless it's a fat smoker on a e bike...seen a few of them lately

So, who [b]are [/b]the other two?

Bullying? Oh do please piss off and stop whining!
Im so fed up with people claiming they're being bullied, when in actual fact they are being presented with facts or differing opinions. Makes me want to repeatedly harm them. Now thats bullying!

Back to the OP, I have a 3 x9 drivetrain with no dropper post and I couldn't give a rats ass what magazines tell me I should be riding. They've been doing it for years and I care not.

[img] [/img]

@Rorschach 😆

Another 3x9 rider* - I hate hearing all this moaning from riders on these new-fangled double ring setups.

* I've also never had a dropper, have 26" wheels, an ISIS BB, flat bars and bar ends and a long stem, it's still just as much fun as it ever was and the only reason I'm slower is my lack of fitness.

So, who are the other two?

an ISIS BB

Careful, now!

[quote=hols2 ]Sure, but old bikes are mostly horrible. Try riding something from 20 years ago with rim brakes, 2" elastomer forks, narrow bars, long stem, non-dropper seatpost.

Try moving forwards a few years - most stuff was fundamentally fixed shortly after that - over 15 years ago I had a susser with well sorted suspension, decent forks and disk brakes, the more recent stuff might be slightly better but there haven't been any revolutions in the last 10 years. The proliferation of new standards which have resulted in marginal improvements has largely been due to bikes being fundamentally sorted. Try riding a 10 year old bike and you'll find it's not horrible at all, just "obsolete".

At some point I'll go single ring, but my triple 9-speed setup refuses to wear out. Possibly something to do with not riding it much...

over 15 years ago I had a susser with well sorted suspension

Modern full suss bikes are light years ahead of their predecessors of 15 years ago. I'm happy for you that you like your bikes, I don't care what people ride, but this statement is tosh of the highest order.

[quote=Nobeerinthefridge ]Modern full suss bikes are light years ahead of their predecessors of 15 years ago.

Compare me a 2017 Orange 5 with a 2002 Orange 5...

aracer - Member

Try moving forwards a few years - most stuff was fundamentally fixed shortly after that - over 15 years ago I had a susser with well sorted suspension, decent forks and disk brakes, the more recent stuff might be slightly better but there haven't been any revolutions in the last 10 years. The proliferation of new standards which have resulted in marginal improvements has largely been due to bikes being fundamentally sorted. Try riding a 10 year old bike and you'll find it's not horrible at all, just "obsolete".

You don't have to go very far back at all to reach 'decent bike, but obsolete'.
My 2010 Stumpjumper FSR rides great, but is 'technically obsolete' I suppose.
3x9, 26" wheels, no dropper, QRs (although it has one of those DT Swiss front axles). I mean.....the headtube on the alloy versions was straight for god's sake!! It was only a warranty upgrade to the carbon version that got me a new fangled tapered steerer!!

Of course, I could switch to a more modern groupset and invest in a dropper post but I don't really have the funds or the inclination. If I was gonna change anything, it would probably be a dropper, over a more trendy groupset.

Regarding the OP - just ignore it. I can't really say I've noticed this 'bullying' but that's probably 'cos I just don't give a shit about it.

Sure, but old bikes are mostly horrible. Try riding something from 20 years ago with rim brakes, 2" elastomer forks, narrow bars, long stem, non-dropper seatpost.

Change rim brakes for disc brakes and you have got yourself a ... GRAVEL BIKE!

I've got both, it makes no difference going up, but I'm definitely faster going down on 2x.

It's total personal preference. There are positives and negatives on both sides. 2x10 weighs more and potentially has more that could go wrong, 1x10/1x11 etc is lighter due to a lot of metal not being there and arguably more convenient and reliable, but a shift failure leaves you with no gear shifting whatever where 2x10 would likely leave you 1x10 or 2x1 in the same situation.

Range doesn't seem to be the major obstacle many of the naysayers seem to fear. This [img] [/img] shows you a comparative illustration with ratios, speed, cadence etc of my old 26/38 11-34 preferred 2x10 configuration against a 36 11-42. The 1x gives up about half a gear at either end, broadly it's covering the same range. I'd say that was acceptable to most. Making it an 11-46 will iron out the bottom end and give you the same climbing range as my old 2x10 had. So long as people don't assume a big cassette automatically grants better climbing when changing everything else too, I'm struggling to see a technical issue here but clearly there's no reason that you can't choose to run whatever gearing (or lack of) makes you happy.

Compare me a 2017 Orange 5 with a 2002 Orange 5...

I said modern.

Does this mean Hammerschmidt is dead then?

Now do the same plot with 1x11 32/11-42 vs 3x9 22-32-44/11-32

I ran out of speed even on a trail descent. Not just road descent on the way to/from trails.

I don't care what people ride. Don't tell me what I should be riding, and don't tell me what is enough.

26er, fixed seatpost, 3x9, ultra narrow 740mm bars, that's practically like riding a bike with square wheels and square chainrings 🙄

I use every one of the gears on my 3x9 from the 22x34 to the 44x11 so until someone comes out with a 68-11t cassette to work with a 44t chainring i'm sticking with it.

I'm on a boost 29+ with 1x11, so close to being the Antichrist, but fortunately it's a hardtail. 😉

[quote=Nobeerinthefridge ]I said modern.

So compare a 2017 O5 with a 2017 anything else - you'd think they'd have gone bust if their bikes are so horrible. There's a lot of BS talked about sus bikes, when plenty of "modern" bikes are little different from single pivots in terms of axle path or anything else in real terms.

When I built my 29er, I deliberately chose to keep the old 3x9 instead of going 1x. What a crazy man.

When I built my commuter up I embraced the single ring as setting up a front mech is one of the most hateful things there is.

So compare a 2017 O5 with a 2017 anything else - you'd think they'd have gone bust if their bikes are so horrible. There's a lot of BS talked about sus bikes, when plenty of "modern" bikes are little different from single pivots in terms of axle path or anything else in real terms.

I can't, because I've never ridden an orange 5, similarly, you've only ridden older FS bikes, maybe you could try sticking to commenting on what you've actually ridden as well?.

Where did I say they were horrible?, I merely pointed out that they hadn't changed their design significantly in all that time.

Do any of you 1xers miss close ratios?

[quote=Nobeerinthefridge ]similarly, you've only ridden older FS bikes

How on earth do you know that?

I merely pointed out that they hadn't changed their design significantly in all that time.

Maybe that's telling you something - you did apparently suggest they were light years behind a modern bike.

That's something i never really noticed on 2x or back as far as 3x tbh. I mean, to actually get those close ratios, you'd be constantly changing up and down on the front, wouldn't you? How do you even know whilst out on the trails what is the next closest gearing on a multiple front ring set up? Do you think to yourself, right I'm in middle ring on the front, middle of the 9 at the back, to get my next closest gearing, I need to go down into granny, and then down what, 3 cogs on cassette?.

I never ever did that, had that thought process, in reality most of my riding on 3x was on the middle ring, and on 2x it was on the bigger one, unless I was on long or steep climbs, which is the only time I used the wee ring at the front.

So really, I had very similar spacing a to what I have now.

Christ that was a bit of a ramble, even bored myself there!. 😆

I'm not engaging you an further aracer, as you're looking for an argument, and it's really not much to do with the OPs point either.

Night night.

OP surely if you don't like the message in the mag stop buying it. At the end of the day they would have to represent views that their readers generally want.

Do any of you 1xers miss close ratios?

I'm actually preferring the one by, mainly because there are less gears to skip through. Sort of like an Alfine I suppose. Not been defeated by a hill yet and haven't noticed on the downs. It's just one less thing to faff with.

Compare me a 2017 Orange 5 with a 2002 Orange 5...

I was going to say different colours, but nope, I'm out of ideas, what's the difference?

Back to the OPs point, I went 1x11 a few years ago, as it was the latest and greatest at the time and for a long time I missed the granny ring of my previous bike. But then I got fitter, and now I don't miss the granny ring, even considering upping the front ring for my new found gunz...

Remember it never gets easier, you just get quicker.

Do any of you 1xers miss close ratios?

No, because it's just the same as changing gear when in the middle ring of a triple. The get the "close ratios" in sequence you have to change a couple of gears at the back and one at the front. As nobeer says most of the time you'll be on one chainring, probably the middle, then select the granny for uphill and the big ring for downhill. Once in the particular ring you won't be searching for the next closest ratio, you'll just move up and down the cogs at the back.

The HT currently has the classic hack of an 10spd XT cassette with the 17T removed and a 40T extender stuck at the bottom end so there's a definite gap at the point where the 17T used to be. When the extender wears out (probably another cassette before it does) then I'll put one of the specific wide range cassettes on, such as the Sunrace which I've got on the fat bike.

I do see the the OP's point but I wouldn't say anyone is being bullied as such.

If your happy riding what you have it's all good surely?

SS, fixed, 3x, 2x, 1x...

I would only be peeved if there was no choice at all. You HAD to go 1x as no one made other options anymore.

I run 1x personally but I like the fact I can choose what to run! 🙂

Don't really understand how anyone can call this bullying. You're oppressing me by saying my older thing is older than the newer thing!

slowoldman - Member

Do any of you 1xers miss close ratios?

I suspect my ratios/gaps are almost identical to yours. It's unintuitive but 11/42 11 speed cassettes are basically an 11/36 10 speed or 11/32 9 speed, with extra cogs.

weeksy - Member

What's that coming in at price wise to jump from 10 speed? £400 ? £500 ? new wheel/hub ? cranks, cassette, chain, shifter, mech....

£330 once the new GX drops. But the thing is, here you're costing it as an additional, that's only the case if you get 10 speed free.

(No need at all to replace cranks, or most decent hubs/wheels, btw)

Poopscoop - Member
If your happy riding what you have it's all good surely?

Not really.

Singletrack has always come across as the most impartial and free from industry bullshit mag available.

I'm happy to believe that Chipps, Mark and all the ST contributors much prefer 650b, 1*, Boost etc to the previous standards.
No issue with that whatsoever.

However, there were (and still are) a huge number of people who disagree with them.
Ignoring those people is one thing, denigrating them in the magazine is something else.

It says 'this mag isn't really for you'.
It's the exact opposite of the inclusivity that all the magazines use as a selling point.

See also 'real mountain bikers don't use cheap Chinese lights' and 'two grand is the new entry point for mtb's', both points of view espoused in Singletrack over the last few years.

If they want to concentrate on a certain demographic then that is their choice.
Being honest about it would be good.
Accepting that other people have a valid point of view would be even better.

Whenever this comes up, the standard industry response (and I include the MTB media) is to belittle those with a different point of view.
It's arrogant, unhelpful and doesn't portray those involved in a particularly pleasant light.

Swoon.

That rant in the OP reads very much like a letter in the MBR. You should try sending it in, you'll maybe win a prize

Aye, a narrow /wide chainring

Incidentally, I resent the way you're bullying me by slagging off my girvin flexstem, I loved mine. OK it was ****-all use on the bike but I converted it into a really brilliant camera mount for my motorbike

It's arrogant, unhelpful and doesn't portray those involved in a particularly pleasant light.

Or, it's a guy just having a bit of tongue in cheek banter. All depends if your one of the permoffended I suppose. It's one of the things I, contrary to the above, really like about the mag, there's lots of contributors opinions in there, but it's [i]their[/i] opinions, not the stance of the magazine per se. Witness Barneys (IIRC) article a few years ago about all other bikes being wrong, pointing out folks excuses about time short etc for MTBing as a justification for road or cx or whatever.

That article ruffled a few feathers, but at least it was interesting.

Better by miles than the robotic drivel in MBR, or that guy from dirt who's so far up his own arsehole he's nearly back out the top.

Bullying? Gies a break.

1x10 wasn't better than 2x10, but 1x11 means it makes sense.

I bought all my 2x10 drivetrain as new parts just under 2 years ago.

After 3 chain replacements at 0.75, by now, most of the parts had worn out beyond use.

Instead of replacing rings/chain/cassette/cables/jockey wheels, I bought a new 1x11 XT gearset and N/W chainring.

Taking into account the lack of front shifting parts, it cost me overall the same as the new 2x10 parts, and yet it's better (for numerous reasons).

I'll certainly be considering the same change on my other 1x9/3x9/2x10 bikes when their rings/cassettes won't mesh with a new chain any more.

Journalist in "Talking crap" shocker.

Stop buying the mags.

Nobeerinthefridge - Member

Or, it's a guy just having a bit of tongue in cheek banter.

I'm not the op, so please don't quote me out of context.
I'm not referring to a few comments in the latest mag, but to the industry attitude in general.

And I'm not offended.
🙂

Once in the particular ring you won't be searching for the next closest ratio, you'll just move up and down the cogs at the back.

I suspect my ratios/gaps are almost identical to yours. It's unintuitive but 11/42 11 speed cassettes are basically an 11/36 10 speed or 11/32 9 speed, with extra cogs.

Nah, that's what I'm saying, the big sprocket is literally an extra, on top of what we're used to. The first 9 gears of an 11-42 are identical to some 11-32 9 speed blocks, they've just added 2 more on top of what we always had. So the range is wider but the gaps are the same.

The 2 new gears do have bigger gaps but as you say it's proportional- the difference between 11 and 12 is pretty much the same as, say, 36 and 40. Same reason an older style cassette starts out 11-12-13 then ends up 24-28

It's weirdly unintuitive, one more cog doesn't feel like it should achieve that. Obviously if you like a 12-25 road cassette that's different but then, if you do, you're probably aware that you're an outlier (just like my 1x9, 50T front 11-28T rear is weird on my hybrid)

Vive la [s]revolution[/s] defence!

Still on 3x9, 16mm rims and rigid post here.
I'm eyeing up a new bike at the moment, the last few candidates are all 2x, no dropper and sub
25mm rims...

Even when you go Single Ring there is another form of Single Ring Bullying. "You're only running a 28, I'm running a 34!" and "That chainring is awfully small!"

I say you need it for steep climbs, they say "Or Stronger Legs"!

Still on 3x9, 16mm rims and rigid post here.
I'm eyeing up a new bike at the moment, the last few candidates are all 2x, no dropper and sub
25mm rims...

With all due respect, that's pretty much because you are buying below the cyclescheme limit IIRC? You would struggle to get a bike with a dropper for that, and if so, something else on the bike would be compromised.

Singletrack used to be different.
I lost an awful lot of respect for them when [s]650b was accepted without any kind of objective analysis of the pros and cons[/s] [b]they started featuring ebikes.[/b]

That is why I don't buy bike mags anymore.... I haven't got a problem with various wheel sizes, tapered steerers, boost hubs.... I don't want to pay to read about motorbikes.
Will always thumb through a may before buying now.

"You're only running a 28, I'm running a 34!"

grannyjone - Member

Even when you go Single Ring there is another form of Single Ring Bullying. "You're only running a 28, I'm running a 34!" and "That chainring is awfully small!"

My fatbike basically has a granny ring on it and no middle or big 😆

I rode a 2012 alpine and a 2006 five back to back at gt a few years ago. The difference was night and day, even for someone who had just started out biking again after 20 years

That said, the difference was definitely not down to how many gears it had!

@slowoldman - correct, it's the percentage difference between cogs you should look at not the difference in teeth. It's why there's 1T difference at the top end, 2T in the middle, then 4T. Going from 11T - 12T is a bigger jump than going from 32T - 36T, the latter should be 33T - 36T