Patent patrol: Campy filed a patent to enable 10t small cogs

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by weiwentg

A tangential thought is that we know that smaller cogs (and chainrings and pulley wheels) mean more drivetrain friction. 10t cogs are pretty small. I wonder why manufacturers aren't sticking with 11t or 12t small cogs and just making bigger chainrings. Is it a frame clearance issue?

It's not about the chainring size, it's about the cassette size - or more specifically, the cassette size differential (and the ability to shift across it). To get a wide range of gearing with a single chainring, you either need to use very large sprockets at the bottom end, or very small sprockets at the top end. A 10-50 cassette has the same range of gearing as a 12-60 cassette, but for the 10-50 cassette the derailleur only has to work over a 40 tooth differential, not the 48 tooth differential of the 12-60. Efficiency is a likely a secondary concern for the people who use these gearing ranges.

Edit: Upon further reflection, it is probably partially about the chainring size. To build a frame with wide tires, there's less space available for chainrings. This has been partially mitigated by the dropped chainstay design, but you can only go so far with this.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by weiwentg

A tangential thought is that we know that smaller cogs (and chainrings and pulley wheels) mean more drivetrain friction. 10t cogs are pretty small. I wonder why manufacturers aren't sticking with 11t or 12t small cogs and just making bigger chainrings. Is it a frame clearance issue?

I think it's to preserve some sort of high end gearing, with a 10t cog, but still have the chainring be small enough to have an uber low gear. Trying to get away from the gig of having gearing to go up hill OR downhill but not both. 12s helps, I guess.BUT, With excellent front ders from all 3 manufacturers, I don't get 1by....for any application.

[Jimborello]

Originally Posted by bicimechanic

This could be related to the Campagnolo gravel group coming out in the near future...

The Gravel trend is really strong and Im guessing they dont want to miss out this time like they did at first with discs

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Jimborello

The Gravel trend is really strong and Im guessing they dont want to miss out this time like they did at first with discs

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...unlike 'one' road disc intro that almost instantly resulted in a huge, expensive recall. Same for electronic. First isn't necessarily 'best' if not ready.
As has been mentioned, Campagnolo has a sub compact crank, mid cage rear dear, disc brakes......etc...

I don't think 1by is an essential except that marketed by one manufacturer.

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

[colker]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...unlike 'one' road disc intro that almost instantly resulted in a huge, expensive recall. Same for electronic. First isn't necessarily 'best' if not ready.
As has been mentioned, Campagnolo has a sub compact crank, mid cage rear dear, disc brakes......etc...

I don't think 1by is an essential except that marketed by one manufacturer.

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

How many people live next to networks of gravel roads? What´s the size of the gravel market? I may be wrong but most of buying public, including the high end, want an all around bicycle. 1x is tempting because most of these people are afraid of the bicycle going wrong under their tuch. I would even risk saying droppers will be a huge success because "i can put my feet down if i need to stop". Disc brakes are adopted for the same reason: perceived function, not real. Carbon is good for it´s mass production possibilities. And then all this stuff is sold to performance cyclists as "progress".
I believe the commuter, non informed cyclist, is the right target for all the industry. A bicycle is a transportation vehicle. The best there is. The future belongs to bicycles. I am ok w/ the mass audience... just don´t sell me mass production angles as performance enhancing technology. It´s BS. By the way... gravel bikes are the new mountain bikes: same angles and capability. A 650B wheeled, disc brake, late 80s mountain bike. Have a good day.

[Davist]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...

Early adopters didn't care/have recovered and "leading from behind" is a tough way to market (my employers philosophy, so we're a bit behind all the time, but the stuff works better, customers view the one who was first as "innovative" and we're a follower). Every manufacturer has issues, it's how you respond (to your further point!) that makes the difference..

[oldpotatoe]

believe the commuter, non informed cyclist, is the right target for all the industry. A bicycle is a transportation vehicle. The best there is. The future belongs to bicycles.

Well, unless the infrastructure changes dramatically, I don't see this in the US. Even where weather isn't an issue, traveling by bike, using a bike for things like buying groceries, is a teeny, tiny percentage. Throw in a family, of say four, in their daily chores and destinations, a bike isn't the best there is at all, again, because of infrastructure and distances involved. Here in the republic, getting a family of four to the theater to see Frozen Two in Westminster, would be really hard....an all day exercise.

I think a family mover will always be a part of Americana, again unless the very structure of the US, cities, towns, roads, highways, living, working, recreating, that have been in development for decades, fundamentally change. That family mover may be electric, but a family mover, nonetheless. If the 350 some million depend on a bike....well, the US will have other problems...like food, water, medicine......

[colker]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Well, unless the infrastructure changes dramatically, I don't see this in the US. Even where weather isn't an issue, traveling by bike, using a bike for things like buying groceries, is a teeny, tiny percentage. Throw in a family, of say four, in their daily chores and destinations, a bike isn't the best there is at all, again, because of infrastructure and distances involved. Here in the republic, getting a family of four to the theater to see Frozen Two in Westminster, would be really hard....an lol day exercise.

I think a family mover will always be a part of Americana, again unless the very structure of the US, cities, towns, roads, highways, living, working, recreating, that have been in development for decades, fundamentally change. That family mover may be electric, but a family mover, nonetheless. If the 350 some million depend on a bike....well, the US will have other problems...like food, water, medicine......

I don´t live in the US but i hear there is a lot of commuting already in the east coast. Where i live, a lot of people gave up owning a car. They either uber, take a subway, bus, cab... or ride a bike. If traveling, rental. The city will do anything for you to give up driving inside the urban perimeter. Europe and Asia have the same thing going on.

[bigbill]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

I considered a 1X when Garro built my gravel bike, it would have given me some more tire clearance. I don't regret going 2X with a 36/46 and 11-32, the only thing I might change is a 34 for the 36. MTB is 1X, 32 with an 11-46.

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by colker

I don´t live in the US but i hear there is a lot of commuting already in the east coast. Where i live, a lot of people gave up owning a car. They either uber, take a subway, bus, cab... or ride a bike. If traveling, rental. The city will do anything for you to give up driving inside the urban perimeter. Europe and Asia have the same thing going on.

This is a personal ideal of mine, but a trip to almost any major American city will show you why there are tremendous hurdles to this. No one is cycling from Sugarland to downtown Houston or El Segundo to Santa Monica on a daily transportation basis. Plenty of people will sit in traffic 2 hours each way to make that drive though.

We decided that autos were king- in fact the spiritual embodiment of American independence during the Post-War era- and marginalized the idea of density, local living, and even marginal inconvenience. We sold the idea that you can live/work/play in a 50 mile radius instead of a 5-10 mile radius, and built our cities accordingly. Any bicycle infrastructure that's available in this environment is an afterthought, a band-aid, a small concession to the idea of a bicycle as recreation, but almost never for a bicycle as transportation.

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Don't think they missed anything but wanted to make sure when they DiD introduce them, they would be industry leading...unlike 'one' road disc intro that almost instantly resulted in a huge, expensive recall. Same for electronic. First isn't necessarily 'best' if not ready.
As has been mentioned, Campagnolo has a sub compact crank, mid cage rear dear, disc brakes......etc...

I don't think 1by is an essential except that marketed by one manufacturer.

Cross racing, I can see it but GRoad bikes, 'gravel grinders', dirt road enthusiasts?
Don't see it as essential, 1by...what about riding on dirt roads makes 1by essential vs a great working double with closer ratio rear cluster..same lower gear, higher high gear?

The 1x "advantage" is rear geometry - if you're trying to fit a tire as big as 700x50 or 650x2.2" and keep the chainstays less than a mile long and maintain a road Q-factor, something has to give. Maybe it's a yoke instead of a tube for the driveside, or a dropped chainstay ala Open or a raised chainstay ala Alfa. Or maybe you just say this is 1x only, no rings bigger than 44t. Some of the carbon frames don't even have mounts for an FD nor could you fit a clamp around the tube shape.

My gravel bike is still 2x, because I think it offers me the most range and versatility for a bike I intend to ride everywhere.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by colker

I don´t live in the US but i hear there is a lot of commuting already in the east coast. Where i live, a lot of people gave up owning a car. They either uber, take a subway, bus, cab... or ride a bike. If traveling, rental. The city will do anything for you to give up driving inside the urban perimeter. Europe and Asia have the same thing going on.

Where do you live?
YES, a lot of younger people have given up on the idea of owning a car..LOTZ do the bus, train, Uber/Lyft gig..and some ride a bike but again, that number is low. A lot of the above it's the expense of living in an urban center and owning a car..parking $, etc..PLUS lotsa single people..add in kids..and again, just doing the daily stuff gets really hard..and then it snows..

Europe and Asia, by comparison, have not had the 'bedroom community/interstate highway' 'phenomenon' that the US saw starting after WW2...Their areas/cities were largely destroyed by the war, along with no cars/fuel..it was all about survival in most cases and the ONLY way to get around was either by foot, by bike or by horse(altho a lot of people couldn't afford to feed it..and lack of food..etc..you get it)...Their urban centers were redesigned to support those ways of transportation..PLUS many family members of various generations living in one place.

NOT trying to be ben downer here..I like bikes a lot too but 'bikes gonna save the world'....gotta disagree with that one.

For Jaybee right above..I get the bigger tire gig but for the person 'Gravel Grinding'..riding on dirt roads for whatever reason..how many opt for or 'need' a 2 inch PLUS size set of tires...'Seems' like the 32-35-38 size would be the sweet spot..particularly since cross racing is at the 32mm level(Yes, I know that is mandated)..but the weight of a 2 inch plus tire? 2 of them?...makes a difference..

and

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Where do you live?
...snip...
For Jaybee right above..I get the bigger tire gig but for the person 'Gravel Grinding'..riding on dirt roads for whatever reason..how many opt for or 'need' a 2 inch PLUS size set of tires...'Seems' like the 32-35-38 size would be the sweet spot..particularly since cross racing is at the 32mm level(Yes, I know that is mandated)..but the weight of a 2 inch plus tire? 2 of them?...makes a difference..

and

I think the key is the combination of road Q factor, short chainstays for snappy handling, and big tires. If you're doing all that, something has to give, and some manufacturers have decided that's going to be the FD. The Pugsley you have a picture of there has mile-long chainstays, an offset rear end and a huge Q-factor.

To keep it Boulder: 35s or smaller are fine for Magnolia Rd, but if you want to keep Marshall Mesa interesting, 650x2.0 on drop bars is a fun way to go. The same tires felt a little small coming down Rollins Pass earlier this summer.

[marciero]

At some point chain pitch might be a consideration. The rationale for more and more cogs on the back has always been tighter ratios, and more recently, wider range with reasonable ratios. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think 12 or 13t smallest cog was normal back in the days of 5,6,7 speeds. But with smaller
cogs come larger jumps for one-tooth difference. The jump from 11 to 10 is 10% compared to about 9% going from 12 to 11. It goes down to a little over 7% going from 15 to 14. This is independent of chainring size and also independent of chain pitch. But with smaller pitch you would have more teeth for a given cog radius and gear inches, so smaller one-tooth jumps.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Jaybee

I think the key is the combination of road Q factor, short chainstays for snappy handling, and big tires. If you're doing all that, something has to give, and some manufacturers have decided that's going to be the FD. The Pugsley you have a picture of there has mile-long chainstays, an offset rear end and a huge Q-factor.

To keep it Boulder: 35s or smaller are fine for Magnolia Rd, but if you want to keep Marshall Mesa interesting, 650x2.0 on drop bars is a fun way to go. The same tires felt a little small coming down Rollins Pass earlier this summer.

If I were to go to Marshall Mesa(I'm not)..I'll borrow Jim's steel hardtail Soulcraft and go bounce around...or his Moots Routt..