Drop stop ring

[bicycletricycle]

Thinking about getting a narrow wide drop stop ring

130bcd 38t or 39t

Looks like wolf tooth and absolute black are my options

Anyone have any experience with these?

Other options I may be missing?

[FlashUNC]

Wolf Tooth are pretty great from what I've seen.

[sandyrs]

I have literally one ride on my 40t wolf tooth with a Rival 11sp mid cage rear derailleur (was already on the bike, short cage would work too), but it was awesome over some really bumpy singletrack. No dropped chains!

[JAGI410]

They work great! More effective at keeping the chain on than clutched derailluers in my experience.

[gospastic]

There is also race face. I've used a Wolf tooth and SRAM as well, they all seem to work.

[a4racer]

While I love the RF narrow-wide rings, I think they only come in 104 BCD and 64 BCD.

The good news is: both the Wolf Tooth and Absolute Black rings are amaze-balls. I've ridden both, but have had more experience with the Wolf Tooth ring, and it was absolutely flawless. If you set the drivetrain up correctly, you won't be dropping a chain!

[bicycletricycle]

i wish someone made a silver one, i think i will be going with the wolf tooth. I really like the style of the absolute black rings but they wont look right on my bike.

[gospastic]

While I love the RF narrow-wide rings, I think they only come in 104 BCD and 64 BCD.

The good news is: both the Wolf Tooth and Absolute Black rings are amaze-balls. I've ridden both, but have had more experience with the Wolf Tooth ring, and it was absolutely flawless. If you set the drivetrain up correctly, you won't be dropping a chain!

RF makes 130bcd CX rings, I have a 40t one.

[wombatspeed]

My wife and I have been running Wolftooth dropstop rings on our mountain bikes for a season now. Not a single dropped chain. And that includes lots of racing and techy riding. For road bike use I can't imagine a dropstop ring could possibly give you any trouble. For CX perhaps add a clutch derailleur if you are particularly clumsy with setting down your bike after barriers ;)

[nooneline]

Thinking about getting a narrow wide drop stop ring

130bcd 38t or 39t

Looks like wolf tooth and absolute black are my options

Anyone have any experience with these?

Other options I may be missing?

You're going to have a hard time finding a 39t chainring that alternates between narrow and wide tooth profiles. :cool:

[GOTHBROOKS]

are all dropstop styled 1x chainrings created equally?
i bought a cheaper 42t all city brand chainring to test the waters and see if that was the right ratio for me. ive dropped the chain a few times out riding. rear der is clutch.
if i threw the all city ring in the trash and upgraded to a wolftooth/absoluteblack 1x ring would that eliminate dropped chains?

[Jaybee]

Looking at All-City's site, I don't see a chainring with true narrow-wide profiling?

Narrow wide looks like this:
https://www.bikerumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Absolute-Black-Narrow-Wide-Chainring-Design.jpg



If you just have a regular singlespeed ring, you won't get the retention benefits and should try something like a Race Face or SRAM or Wolftooth ring. Make sure it alternates thick and thin teeth.

[eBAUMANN]

been on wolftooth rings for about 5 years, on every bike i own that touches dirt. they have only gotten better as they refine the tooth profile.

never ridden absolute black but they also seem fine, i just prefer the WTC aesthetic.

another good company for NW is garbaruk, definitely under the radar but very good, super tall teeth that hold the chain on through anything you can throw at it.

also, AARN recently released his 1x rings after several years of R&D (http://shop.44rn.com/product/aarn-110-38-40-42-1x-11-speed-chainring-110bcd-38-40-42-tooth). they come in black AND SILVER.
ive been on one of the prototypes for a couple years now and can report they work great.

[mktng]

blackspire.
i have a snaggle tooth on one of my bikes. no issues. good quality. well priced

[Mark McM]

I haven't used narrow/wide chainrings, so I have a question:

Does the chain have to be installed so that the outer chain plates are over the wide teeth, and the inner chain plates are over the narrow teeth?

[gpendergast]

I haven't used narrow/wide chainrings, so I have a question:

Does the chain have to be installed so that the outer chain plates are over the wide teeth, and the inner chain plates are over the narrow teeth?

Yeah the chain has to be 'in-phase' with the chainring, and there's only one way it will go on

[chrismoustache]

Lots of good success with RF rings. They definitely make a 130 in a 38t.

[DRZRM]

One more fanboy! Wolftooth on what was first a 1x10 and then later a 1x11, flawless performance.

[Veloo]

I got one form these guys and am happy with it so far.
Mine is a 4 arm 104 BCD 40 tooth.

I'm assuming yours is 5 arm.

http://www.amber-bikes.com/130_BCD_OvalRound/p3835754_16169544.aspx

[chiasticon]

Yeah the chain has to be 'in-phase' with the chainring, and there's only one way it will go onyeah this is the big downside if you ever drop a chain in a cross race: putting it back on correctly while in the heat of battle. :eek:

[benb]

Can someone educate me on this?

Is this a thing when you run a 1X setup? Or is it a thing with giant cogs in the back? Or with certain Full Suspension geometries/setups?

I've been running my old school 3x9 drivetrain on my MTB for 13 years.. it's probably dropped the chain less than 5X in all that time. I would have thought it's one of the worst cases as it's full suspension and I jump and do all kinds of stuff beyond what would ever be normal in cross or gravel riding.

Guess I'm not seeing why this is suddenly so necessary? Some advance since I last rebuilt my MTB that breaks holding the chain on?

[eBAUMANN]

Can someone educate me on this?

Is this a thing when you run a 1X setup? Or is it a thing with giant cogs in the back? Or with certain Full Suspension geometries/setups?

I've been running my old school 3x9 drivetrain on my MTB for 13 years.. it's probably dropped the chain less than 5X in all that time. I would have thought it's one of the worst cases as it's full suspension and I jump and do all kinds of stuff beyond what would ever be normal in cross or gravel riding.

Guess I'm not seeing why this is suddenly so necessary? Some advance since I last rebuilt my MTB that breaks holding the chain on?

Lack of dropped chains is a byproduct of 1x.

The primary reason is simplicity. 1 less shifter, 1 less derailleur, and 2 less rings to break/buy/replace/maintain. You also get less chain slap thanks to the clutch RD and the less range needed to be covered in cassette/ring combos.

The secondary reason is WEIGHT. You can drop nearly a pound moving to a modern 1x system.

Thirdly, there is just no real benefit of having 27 speeds on a bike.

Personally I have only ridden an "11 speed" bike for cx/mtn purposes for the last 6 years and will never put a fd on any of those bikes.
It adds nothing to my riding experience other than weight/complexity.

[NHAero]

Your FD keeps the chain on in most cases where it might not stay on a 1x chainring. After throwing a chain on a dirt road on a 1x10 with a NW chainring and no clutch RD, I installed a chainguide. I didn't put one on my CAAD10 converted to 1x11, but that's not going to see dirt roads. I did put a NW ring on though.

Can someone educate me on this?

Is this a thing when you run a 1X setup? Or is it a thing with giant cogs in the back? Or with certain Full Suspension geometries/setups?

I've been running my old school 3x9 drivetrain on my MTB for 13 years.. it's probably dropped the chain less than 5X in all that time. I would have thought it's one of the worst cases as it's full suspension and I jump and do all kinds of stuff beyond what would ever be normal in cross or gravel riding.

Guess I'm not seeing why this is suddenly so necessary? Some advance since I last rebuilt my MTB that breaks holding the chain on?

[NHAero]

I have three 1x set-ups three different NW ring products - Wolftooth, Blackspire, and Race Face. All seem to do the job.

[eBAUMANN]

Your FD keeps the chain on in most cases where it might not stay on a 1x chainring. After throwing a chain on a dirt road on a 1x10 with a NW chainring and no clutch RD, I installed a chainguide. I didn't put one on my CAAD10 converted to 1x11, but that's not going to see dirt roads. I did put a NW ring on though.

why didnt you just put a clutch rd on the bike?
thats half of the equation for getting a NW ring to work as it was designed.

[GOTHBROOKS]

haha turns out the all city ring is just a singlespeed ring. for some reason my dumbass assumed it had profiled teeth instead of just no shift ramps. my bad!
so uhhhhhh anyone got a 130bcd 42t wolftooth they dont need anymore?

[NHAero]

At the time it didn't seem as though I could get a clutch RD that I could shift with the 6600 STI shifter I had.

why didnt you just put a clutch rd on the bike?
thats half of the equation for getting a NW ring to work as it was designed.

[AngryScientist]

the raceface rings are pretty nice too. ran one for quite a while with no dropped chains.

[SpeedyChix]

I’ve been really happy with both Wolftooth and RaceFace/Easton n/w rings. They all really grip the chain. Durability has been solid as well.

[benb]

Lack of dropped chains is a byproduct of 1x.

The primary reason is simplicity. 1 less shifter, 1 less derailleur, and 2 less rings to break/buy/replace/maintain. You also get less chain slap thanks to the clutch RD and the less range needed to be covered in cassette/ring combos.

The secondary reason is WEIGHT. You can drop nearly a pound moving to a modern 1x system.

Thirdly, there is just no real benefit of having 27 speeds on a bike.

Personally I have only ridden an "11 speed" bike for cx/mtn purposes for the last 6 years and will never put a fd on any of those bikes.
It adds nothing to my riding experience other than weight/complexity.

I get the weight weenie aspects. Just not getting why not having a front derailleur means chains jumping off. There have been plenty of bikes with no front derailleur for decades that didn't have chronic problems with the chain jumping off the chainring. The weight thing is going to keep a lot of people but I don't necessarily buy it as anything serious, 99% of the time when I've been MTBing you don't get dropped cause of anything to do with your bike, you get dropped due to fitness or a technical obstacle that riders in front of you can handle better than you can, or the combination of the two, you're too gassed to keep your head on straight to do the technical stuff. The larger gearing ranges with tighter cog spacing on the older setup allow better control of cadence and are better if you're riding up and down stuff. It seems riding up stuff or riding great distances becomes ever less important as MTBs go forward.

I'm guessing the real reason is cogs in the back that are as big or bigger than the single chainring, combined with the MTB jumping/whatever use cases. In most traditional setups the smallest ring in the front is bigger than the largest cog in the back so the chain can bounce a little and it's not going to bounce high enough to knock it off the ring. Now you reverse things and maybe the chain can jump more easily.

I've always found the claims about triples being problematic interesting cause I've just never had any trouble. 100% of the triples I've had have always been easier to get a flawless setup out of than any compact 2x setup I've used, probably because the triple has the smallest tooth differences between rings. IME even the cheap triples on $500 hybrids (I've setup/fixed/tuned family members bikes like that) still setup and shift better than near top of the line compact setups.

Clearly 1x should be the easiest of all to setup, no argument there. But it's partly like did everyone go to 2X because triples were uncool, and then they went to 1x because compacts suck, and then they had to go to giant cogs in the back, and then the chain jumps off. Solutions to a problem that never existed except for weight and maybe Q factor.

I rarely use all 27 gears on my MTB... the granny ring would only really be useful other parts of the country where I might be on a extended (miles) climb that was very steep (steeper than any paved road likely) but not very technical, and on rides of great distances. Certainly the 3x gearing I have is not ideal for where I live and I'm not going to be putting any rides together much > 25 miles without having to connect trail systems with plenty of road riding. I'm mostly on what I'm because I'm lazy and have been riding the same crankset for > 10 years and it refuses to die.

[Tony]

I have Wolf Tooth, Absolute Black, and Oneup in 32t, 34t.
Oneup seems to put more effort into machining. The rings have more intricate, complex work done.

[eBAUMANN]

I get the weight weenie aspects. Just not getting why not having a front derailleur means chains jumping off. There have been plenty of bikes with no front derailleur for decades that didn't have chronic problems with the chain jumping off the chainring. The weight thing is going to keep a lot of people but I don't necessarily buy it as anything serious, 99% of the time when I've been MTBing you don't get dropped cause of anything to do with your bike, you get dropped due to fitness or a technical obstacle that riders in front of you can handle better than you can, or the combination of the two, you're too gassed to keep your head on straight to do the technical stuff. The larger gearing ranges with tighter cog spacing on the older setup allow better control of cadence and are better if you're riding up and down stuff. It seems riding up stuff or riding great distances becomes ever less important as MTBs go forward.

I'm guessing the real reason is cogs in the back that are as big or bigger than the single chainring, combined with the MTB jumping/whatever use cases. In most traditional setups the smallest ring in the front is bigger than the largest cog in the back so the chain can bounce a little and it's not going to bounce high enough to knock it off the ring. Now you reverse things and maybe the chain can jump more easily.

I've always found the claims about triples being problematic interesting cause I've just never had any trouble. 100% of the triples I've had have always been easier to get a flawless setup out of than any compact 2x setup I've used, probably because the triple has the smallest tooth differences between rings. IME even the cheap triples on $500 hybrids (I've setup/fixed/tuned family members bikes like that) still setup and shift better than near top of the line compact setups.

Clearly 1x should be the easiest of all to setup, no argument there. But it's partly like did everyone go to 2X because triples were uncool, and then they went to 1x because compacts suck, and then they had to go to giant cogs in the back, and then the chain jumps off. Solutions to a problem that never existed except for weight and maybe Q factor.

I rarely use all 27 gears on my MTB... the granny ring would only really be useful other parts of the country where I might be on a extended (miles) climb that was very steep (steeper than any paved road likely) but not very technical, and on rides of great distances. Certainly the 3x gearing I have is not ideal for where I live and I'm not going to be putting any rides together much > 25 miles without having to connect trail systems with plenty of road riding. I'm mostly on what I'm because I'm lazy and have been riding the same crankset for > 10 years and it refuses to die.

A simpler way to look at it:

1x PROS
- cheaper
- simpler
- lighter
- safer (no un-used chainrings ready to stab you in the leg in the event of a crash)
- increased chainring clearance (for clearing those technical obstacles you mentioned)
- increased chain retention (i guarantee you a triple/double will drop a chain first if subjected to the same conditions)
- a cleaner looking/working bike (in the days of remotes for your fork, rear shock, and seatpost, one less thing strapped to your bars is always welcome)
- BONUS - you get to buy chainrings from small american companies making cool stuff

1x CONS
- not enough gears (subjective)
- too large of a jump between gears (subjective)
- ?

I went 1x 7 years ago after my first half of a season of cx racing. I realized I was not using the 46t ring on my 46/38 crank. It was just sitting there, sharp and ready, waiting to gore my calf. So I took it off. I had always wanted a paul chain catcher (because I like supporting small american companies making cool stuff) so this seemed like a great opportunity. The more streamlined/clean look of the bike without extra un-used cables and chainrings was also welcomed.

A year later wolf tooth released their first chainring, originally only for mtb's - i bought one immediately and never looked back.

Most "innovations" and "progression" come from the industry...but not 1x. 1x has existed for DECADES and came from people who actually ride and race their bikes, 1x emerged in the name of practicality and refinement instead of the new "standards" and unnecessary complexity the industry is forced to create in the name of profits every year.

[Tony]

[QUOTE=eBAUMANN;2314616]A simpler way to look at it:

1x PROS
- cheaper
- simpler
- lighter
- safer (no un-used chainrings ready to stab you in the leg in the event of a crash)
- increased chainring clearance (for clearing those technical obstacles you mentioned)
- increased chain retention (i guarantee you a triple/double will drop a chain first if subjected to the same conditions)
- a cleaner looking/working bike (in the days of remotes for your fork, rear shock, and seatpost, one less thing strapped to your bars is always welcome)
- BONUS - you get to buy chainrings from small american companies making cool stuff



Also easier to clean!