SRAM XX1/X01 'Eagle 12 Speed'

so i think the point of a 50t ring isn't to run a 30t up front, it's to run a 34-36t up front, still be able to pedal it up hill without your knees exploding, and have that 36 x 10 for when you go down.

I think what we are missing in all of this is that this isn't meant for us. Around here there is no need for that type of gear range as we don't have much really extended climbing and don't have anything in the way of extended downhills that allow you to open up like that. When I rode out in santa cruz with my friend 2 years ago we did 14 miles of off road uphill all at once and the reward was vomit, lunch, then 14 miles of all downhill. before we left his house he looked at my bike and threw me an old small front chain ring (don't remember the gearing) and told me to put it on. once the climbing started, i finger shifted into that little ring and i was glad i had it. So the take away is that no, you don't need this around here. But people who ride in areas different from here might think differently.

And the old "just use a front derailleur" is not a solution. I took off my front derailleur not to look cool or to save weight but to make more room for my dropper post lever which is more important to me then more than one front chain ring. It also allowed me to use a N/W chain ring which has eliminated chain drops for me.
 
greeek32 said:
so i think the point of a 50t ring isn't to run a 30t up front, it's to run a 34-36t up front, still be able to pedal it up hill
Click to expand...

Bingo. Still, the 50t carries a good weight penalty
 
pearl said:
i want that 11-50t in the rear on 50/34 road bike setup
Click to expand...

I can think of exactly zero clearance issues you would encounter with that setup.

greeek32 said:
so i think the point of a 50t ring isn't to run a 30t up front, it's to run a 34-36t up front, still be able to pedal it up hill without your knees exploding, and have that 36 x 10 for when you go down.
Click to expand...

In the words of Clarence Darrow ... "but still ..."

Seriously, even if we grant the 50t as reasonable for a 36t ring up front (which I still think is totally unnecessary unless you happen to be one of the Khumbu Ice Doctors and you are using your bike to shuttle ladders up on to the ice fall on Everest), think about the 36:10 and its reasonable application to a mountainbike. A 36:10 has a gain ratio of 7.58 on a 29er. That translates to over 27 feet traveled for every pedal stroke. That's 27 feet on a trail, which usually has things like loose dirt or holes or sticks on it. If you are just coasting down a hill with gravity driving you, all your concentration can be on your line. If you are focused on pedaling fast enough to outpace what you'd get from gravity alone (which, let's face it, is the only reason you'd want to use a 36:10 in the first place) then not all of your focus can be on the trail itself and with 27 feet traveled per pedal stroke, your reaction time to things that pop up in front of you is going to be *kinda* minimal, right?
 
greeek32 said:
this isn't meant for us.
Click to expand...
Agree Ted....Although for my trigger, it does sound kinda fun for those days when I want to be an idiot and ride up mountain creek lol. That has a 1x10 with a 28T on the front and an 11-36...works good enough and cost next to nothing to put together.

I keep my XC bike 1x10 mainly because its more than enough gearing 34T front, 11-36 cassette, plus its WAY cheaper, and its also about a half pound lighter if you compare just the RD, cassette, shifter.
 
1speed said:
I can think of exactly zero clearance issues you would encounter with that setup.



In the words of Clarence Darrow ... "but still ..."

Seriously, even if we grant the 50t as reasonable for a 36t ring up front (which I still think is totally unnecessary unless you happen to be one of the Khumbu Ice Doctors and you are using your bike to shuttle ladders up on to the ice fall on Everest), think about the 36:10 and its reasonable application to a mountainbike. A 36:10 has a gain ratio of 7.58 on a 29er. That translates to over 27 feet traveled for every pedal stroke. That's 27 feet on a trail, which usually has things like loose dirt or holes or sticks on it. If you are just coasting down a hill with gravity driving you, all your concentration can be on your line. If you are focused on pedaling fast enough to outpace what you'd get from gravity alone (which, let's face it, is the only reason you'd want to use a 36:10 in the first place) then not all of your focus can be on the trail itself and with 27 feet traveled per pedal stroke, your reaction time to things that pop up in front of you is going to be *kinda* minimal, right?
Click to expand...
Justin-Timberlake-Blank-Stare.gif
 
UtahJoe said:
Of course..... I knew it was him lol
Click to expand...
Think of all the money you save on Stans fluid because the bike you got in 2015 came with non tubeless compatible rims that weigh 400 pounds. AND XT HUBS so you have to pack cone wrenches in your saddle bag for when your cassette falls off mid race.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom