What are the big 3 waiting for to go sub-compact?

[oldmill]

Yes R3 - I have noticed that Easton crank, and it has indeed inspired a bout of feverish credit-card suppression. I’m going to give this one a little more time. If you see me hitchhiking or passed out along the 115km D2R2 Route, you’ll know I made the wriong choice. Break glass, contact Easton in that case. Thanks for the suggestion.

[Hindmost]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Find a low cost triple(like 130/74mm bcd), put 46 on middle position, 30t on small. Recognize you can as small as 38/26(maybe 24?).

I did this in the superior Italian 135/74mm bcd. Currently running a 42 in the middle and a 28 small on an on/off road bike. Works amazingly well.

[R3awak3n]

Originally Posted by oldmill

Yes R3 - I have noticed that Easton crank, and it has indeed inspired a bout of feverish credit-card suppression. I’m going to give this one a little more time. If you see me hitchhiking or passed out along the 115km D2R2 Route, you’ll know I made the wriong choice. Break glass, contact Easton in that case. Thanks for the suggestion.

[Marc40a]

Originally Posted by jtbadge

I’m running 46-34 in the front and a SRAM 11-36 in the back.

For the riding that I want to do more of, this sounds close to ideal to me. If a mid cage derailleur could handle a 40t cassette, even better

[NHAero]

What is the chainline you get, between the two remaining rings?

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

yes, i'm running a few bikes with modified campy triples to run my preferred 46/30 - but this is not exactly an off the shelf modern solution....

[doomridesout]

Shimano is getting on board in the next three months, I can say no more in public.

[fried bake]

Originally Posted by doomridesout

Shimano is getting on board in the next three months, I can say no more in public.

This makes me very happy. I shan’t repeat a word of it however.

[TheseGoTo11]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Those that ‘need’ lower than 1:1 gearing is a teeny, teeny, tiny segment. I wouldn’t expect even shimano to tool up for a crank like that. Actually pretty funny...so many harkened for a ‘compact’...now sounds like what would be perfect, is a ......triple.

I think the segment of riders that could benefit from gearing lower than 1:1 is larger than any of us bike nerds appreciate. There’s a ton of people who ride, and ride often, but don’t live and breathe the inside intricacies of componentry like us. They don’t document their dream gearing on forums like this, they just ride on what the bike shop sold them. So you don’t hear their opinions, which makes them easy to overlook. I did Ride the Rockies with my wife a few years ago, which was eye-opening. Half the participants were probably retirees, many of whom were riding nice bikes albeit over geared for their style of riding and ability. Even “compact” 50/34 rings are too much for a good chunk of riders out there. But, they’re still buying the bikes despite being poorly suited to them. Point is, unless there’s a critical mass rejecting what’s currently on offer, despite its inadequacies, what’s Shimano’s or SRAM’s incentive to offer a more suitable alternative (like a triple)? In terms of the entire population of bike buyers, I suspect the portion that is vocal about what they want in gearing and other components isn’t large enough to make the risk of additional product lines worth the reward.

[R3awak3n]

Sub-compact is the future for sure. Most people don’t need s 50 but could use a 32 or even a 30. I love my 48-32. I think that is about perfect. Just recently dis 45-34 and again, its actually really good for a round here. Rolling hills I can stay on the 46 all day long.

With cassettes getting bigger you can easily do 1:1 with a 34 small ring but I prefer having a smaller ring in the front and closer ratios in the back.

Can’t wait to see what shimano will have to offer. Makes sense they are the ones to do it. Sram is all invested in 1x and campy is more into racing stuff and I dont think pros will be going sub compact for a while

[Zee]

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

Sub-compact is the future for sure. Most people don’t need s 50 but could use a 32 or even a 30. I love my 48-32. I think that is about perfect. Just recently dis 45-34 and again, its actually really good for a round here. Rolling hills I can stay on the 46 all day long.

With cassettes getting bigger you can easily do 1:1 with a 34 small ring but I prefer having a smaller ring in the front and closer ratios in the back.

Can’t wait to see what shimano will have to offer. Makes sense they are the ones to do it. Sram is all invested in 1x and campy is more into racing stuff and I dont think pros will be going sub compact for a while

Originally Posted by doomridesout

Shimano is getting on board in the next three months, I can say no more in public.

I like what you mentioned about SRAM being 1x and Campy being racer oriented, but I have to add Shimano is feeling more responsive to the industry and retail trends. If that is a good or bad thing, I do not know, but I think it is at least a sensible business decision.

A non-mountain rear derailleur with a clutch that supports a front mech and this sub compact crank rumor are nice additions to the market.

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

. Sram is all invested in 1x

that's true, but sram is also very well set up to go sub compact in a heartbeat, as mentioned in another thread, since most of their road cranks use a detachable spider. all they need to do is rebrand some of their mtb subcompact bcd spiders for "gravel" and boom, they have sub compact compatibility for the road.

i'm happy and excited to see what will come out in the next few years in this space.

i just dont need or use a ring bigger than 48 pretty much ever.

[NHAero]

Nick, what is the chainline you get with that Campy Veloce set-up using the two inner rings? Thanks

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by NHAero

Nick, what is the chainline you get with that Campy Veloce set-up using the two inner rings? Thanks

that's a good question. i have no idea. i can try and measure it this weekend though.

this is the measurement we are talking about, correct?

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by NHAero

What is the chainline you get, between the two remaining rings?

Done this more than once. Campag triples were designed to easily use the middle ring for the entire cogset range w/o a weird chainline. Putting the big ring on the middle position results in a nice chainline since a line from the middle CR to the middle of the cogset results in a line parallel to the top tube..proper CL..

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by R3awak3n

Sub-compact is the future for sure. Most people don’t need s 50 but could use a 32 or even a 30. I love my 48-32. I think that is about perfect. Just recently dis 45-34 and again, its actually really good for a round here. Rolling hills I can stay on the 46 all day long.

With cassettes getting bigger you can easily do 1:1 with a 34 small ring but I prefer having a smaller ring in the front and closer ratios in the back.

Can’t wait to see what shimano will have to offer. Makes sense they are the ones to do it. Sram is all invested in 1x and campy is more into racing stuff and I dont think pros will be going sub compact for a while

Not sure about that. With 'road' cogsets coming in the 32/34t(+) variety..having a wee small ring makes ratios that for some, just aren't useable..for road 'enthusiasts'...a 30t small and 34t big cog, type thing.

Bigger cogsets, and 12s is way cheaper than making a new crankset...I think very few would opt for a teeny small ring and giganto cogset, IMHO, unless loaded touring or that sort of thing.

I find it 'interesting' of this talk about subcompacts and in the same breath, many extol the virtues of road, 1by..curious..