1x drivetrain wear

[shankldu]

So on 1 x 9 10 etc drivetrains is there more stress , wear on the chain as it is more out of line in the lowest and highest gear . In the old day is was said that u should move the chain in the front to the lower front ring as your moving to the big ring in the rear as it binds the chain a bit . thoughts opinions ?

[dgoodwin]

Move to General Discussion?

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by dgoodwin

Move to General Discussion?

done

[avalonracing]

Don't worry, once everyone has a 1X front the manufacturers will come out with an innovative new 2X front crank to reduce wear and give more gearing options. It will also have the advantage of lighter weight from a shorter chain and smaller rear derailleur.

[Ken Robb]

Originally Posted by avalonracing

Don't worry, once everyone has a 1X front the manufacturers will come out with an innovative new 2X front crank to reduce wear and give more gearing options. It will also have the advantage of lighter weight from a shorter chain and smaller rear derailleur.

I think you are prescient.

[Tony]

Originally Posted by shankldu

So on 1 x 9 10 etc drivetrains is there more stress , wear on the chain as it is more out of line in the lowest and highest gear . In the old day is was said that u should move the chain in the front to the lower front ring as your moving to the big ring in the rear as it binds the chain a bit . thoughts opinions ?

Yes, for sure more wear. My 1x11, 1x10, wears out chains, rings, cass maybe 30% faster than my 2x drivetrains. Also, my home brew chain oil does not work as well on 1x compared to 2x drivetrain, much noisier.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by shankldu

So on 1 x 9 10 etc drivetrains is there more stress , wear on the chain as it is more out of line in the lowest and highest gear . In the old day is was said that u should move the chain in the front to the lower front ring as your moving to the big ring in the rear as it binds the chain a bit . thoughts opinions ?

A 'proper' 1 by setup 'should' have the chainring in line with center of cogset but even with that, the 'extremes' will tend to wear the chainring more quickly just like big-big riding does..
Unfortunately, with 'GRoad' setups and fat chainstays, often the single front ring is more aligned with the smallest 1/3 of the cogset so the resulting 'angle' of the chain to cogset in lower gears wears 'stuff' more quickly.

[frankjconway]

I’ll take the extra wear just for the simplicity of 1x.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blue Jays]

Consider worn bicycle components as a badge of honor.
Chains, chainrings, cassettes, saddles...it is a well-deserved reward when that stuff is replaced.
Be happy when it happens. It means you are enjoying time on your bicycles.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by frankjconway

I’ll take the extra wear just for the simplicity of 1x.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NOT trying to start a 1by vs 2by 'argument' but with very few exceptions, LH shifter/front der/crankset setups in 2by are VERY reliable, very efficient and considering the 'extra' needed for 1by with uber wide chainrings and clutch rear ders...
Kinda just don't get it...gearing issues, ability to go up hill or down hill 'fast', due to cogset and singe front ring..needing 11s or 12s to get the same range..giganto rear clusters..

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by frankjconway

I’ll take the extra wear just for the simplicity of 1x.

Based on the test report in the latest issue of Velonews, you'll also have to accept a loss of drivetrain efficiency, also. In the report, they tested an SRAM 1x drivetrain against a Shimano 2x drivetrain (the chainrings/cassettes were selected so that they had the same range of gear ratios). The 1x had a lower efficiency in all gears - the 1x had average loss of 4.9%, while the 2x had an average loss of 3.8%. At the extreme ends of the range, the losses of the 1x were far worse than the 2x - in the highest gear, the 1x had a loss of 7.6%, while the 2x had a loss of only 5.2%. In a sport of marginal gains, the extra losses in the 1x drivetrain are significant - An extra loss of 2% is like adding an extra 4 lb. on a climb.

The largest part of the losses in the 1x drivetrain were due to the smaller chainring/sprockets. The test in the report was performed before the SRAM AXS group was available, but the SRAM 1x drivetrain tested has similar sprocket and chainring sizes as the AXS 2x drivetrain, so similar efficiency losses would be expected with the AXS group as well.

[Tony]

Love the way you break this sh$t down!

[gdw]

Originally Posted by Blue Jays

Consider worn bicycle components as a badge of honor.
Chains, chainrings, cassettes, saddles...it is a well-deserved reward when that stuff is replaced.
Be happy when it happens. It means you are enjoying time on your bicycles.

I'm happier running drivetrains that don't have to be replaced every 40-50 days. Replacing 1x components get rather expensive if you spend a lot of time on the bike.

[dddd]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

Based on the test report in the latest issue of Velonews, you'll also have to accept a loss of drivetrain efficiency, also. In the report, they tested an SRAM 1x drivetrain against a Shimano 2x drivetrain (the chainrings/cassettes were selected so that they had the same range of gear ratios). The 1x had a lower efficiency in all gears - the 1x had average loss of 4.9%, while the 2x had an average loss of 3.8%. At the extreme ends of the range, the losses of the 1x were far worse than the 2x - in the highest gear, the 1x had a loss of 7.6%, while the 2x had a loss of only 5.2%. In a sport of marginal gains, the extra losses in the 1x drivetrain are significant - An extra loss of 2% is like adding an extra 4 lb. on a climb.

The largest part of the losses in the 1x drivetrain were due to the smaller chainring/sprockets. The test in the report was performed before the SRAM AXS group was available, but the SRAM 1x drivetrain tested has similar sprocket and chainring sizes as the AXS 2x drivetrain, so similar efficiency losses would be expected with the AXS group as well.

This is the kind of data that I have been waiting for.
I've been suggesting for many years now that the chainring count be increased in a closer-ratio format that allows narrower chainring spacing and lighter structure of the chainring assembly, and have suggested to industry leaders such as Shimano that as many as four chainrings be considered. With their RhythmStep being developed for their Di2-shifted, multiple-chainring bikes, why don't road bikes use at least a close-ratio triple these days?
One thing that limits design freedom in this and other regards is the maximum rear tire width, so frames given more clearance than will actually be exploited by the end user are compromised in terms of such design freedom.
Without the benefit of such data, I was most curious about how TTT's single-ring racing bikes would fare, but it's now apparent how that went.

Whatever ends up being developed to address this issue will best be introduced timely to the expiration of whatever successful previous marketing push is in vogue, so additional development time can better benefit both the function and marketability value of such changes.
But competition between brands of course also tends to force new ideas to market earlier.

Now road bikes obviously aren't suffering the level of frictional losses from downsized chainrings or from severe offsetting of the chainline from the center of the cassette as today's mountain bikes are, but still some measurable gains from added chainring counts could be quantified that might challenge the current design orthodoxy of road and gravel bikes.

[Blue Jays]

Originally Posted by Blue Jays

"...Consider worn bicycle components as a badge of honor.
Chains, chainrings, cassettes, saddles...it is a well-deserved reward when that stuff is replaced.
Be happy when it happens. It means you are enjoying time on your bicycles..."

Originally Posted by gdw

"...I'm happier running drivetrains that don't have to be replaced every 40-50 days.
Replacing 1x components get rather expensive if you spend a lot of time on the bike..."

You are seriously replacing entire drivetrains every other month?
That is some remarkably powerful riding. That is awesome!