Quote:
Originally Posted by R3awak3n
Its an idea but I rather just move to an 1X system and be done with it. I definitely like 2x more than 1x but that bike will be on gravel 90% of the time so 1x is totally fine for that. I will have 2 2x bikes so I won't be missing it as much and can ride a different bike if I am going to be on pavement too much.
I will message them and see how long. I don't really need the bike for a minute so i am ok waiting. Just want to make sure they are good and people have had good experince. Its fine if they are back logged but if they tell me 2 months I want to make sure its 2 months, not 8.
|
A lot to unpack from your earlier posts, but just to ramble along,,,
-The stock paint on the OPEN is notoriously soft. I've never heard of someone dropping a chain and coming out unscathed - there's always damage down to the primer if not to the clear coat above the bare carbon. That being said, when I did my removal project last year I was pleasantly surprised at how nice the carbon and clearcoat underneath was. The clearcoat has a nice satin finish and has an almost frosted glass texture, very hard. And the carbon layup underneath shows A LOT of precise planning and lapping.
-Drew at cyclocarbon has an EXCELLENT reputation and is very reasonable. His carbon fixes are great while his painting is improving. I've heard both positive and negative on his finishes, but over the past year or so the words is he's been slowly implementing more professional techniques into his workshop for painting.
-Velocolour is great, but VERY expensive. A chip repair for $250 CAD (~175 USD) plus shipping sounds about right, but the previous poster was on a steel SV vs a carbon OPEN. Totally different ball game.
-As for the chainsuck I see it more as a combo of the Potenza not being optimized for rough riding and the Easton crank having a slightly suboptimal chainline for the FD to work as advertised. 2mm at the hub isn't that big a deal, but 2mm at the FD is huge.
-Also, is your Potenza crank for the DB spacing or regular? See
here for more details, but especially this:
Quote:
|
it’s pretty obvious that if you are going from 130mm road hub spacing to the nominal 135mm hub spacing of the going 12×142 thru-axle standard and you keep your rings in the same place, the chainline relationship of cassette to chainring is no longer going to be perfectly aligned where you wanted it. Campagnolo is a stickler for precise shift performance, so just moving the cassette outboard an extra 2.5mm wasn’t acceptable to them when they had the ability to easily adapt to the new alignment.
|
https://bikerumor.com/2017/05/09/cam...a-11-aluminum/
-Also a clutch RD and/or narrow/wide or dropstop chainrings makes a gigantic difference in chain retention. I used regular 11s ETAP 1X for a while on my previous UP, and I always paired it with an X-Sync chainring. While the combo was louder than a clutch RD it never dropped a chain.
-If you're on gravel 90% of the time it seems like you'd want a group that's optimized for rougher roads or at least has functional elements for dealing with the elements encountered. Narrow/wide chainrings, slightly wider chainline for clearance, clutch RD. Don't think Potenza has any of those, although some of it can be implemented through other means. Wolftooth roadlink and long cage Potenza RD for the range, swapping in chainrings or a crankset that can accommodate narrow wide chainrings.
Honestly don't think it's as much to do with the frameset as the groupset WRT the dropped chains. But I could easily be wrong as OPEN tends to ignore their legitimate concerns until they come to a head.