SRAM for Trouring

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by reohn2 »

honesty wrote:The sram 1x11 mountain bike setups are an interesting proposition (not there cyclocross cx1 one though as the cassette only goes down to 32). The X01 and XX1 have a 11-42 cassette. With a 34 tooth front chainset I would get very close to the range I currently use on my triple when touring. I never use the 48 tooth on the chainset when touring, so my actual gear use tops out at 11 rear 36 front, and the lowest is a 26 front 32 rear. With a 1x11 I'd get the same range but lest complication and reduced weight. I guess though the rear wheel will be weaker to take into account the increased space needed for 1x11 cassette? Only problem for me at the moment would be its flat bar only, sram 11 speed is not cross compatible between road and MTB product lines as far as I'm aware.

If you're using Shimano I'd urge to to look at a 24/34/44 chainring triple,it will work with road STI's and a road front mech or a friction lever and a road or MTB f/mech.With an MTB cassette 44x11 is a big enough top gear for most folks.
I'm even more sceptical of a 1x11 than I am of a 2x11 :? the range is there,but the gaps must be atrocious in the cruising gear range :shock: .I think we should remember that MTB riding isn't the same a touring where huge gap in ratios are(for me at least)quite unpleasant to say the least and that's before we consider chainlines and resultant drivetrain wear
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by reohn2 »

andrewjoseph wrote:I've got sram APEX on my bike (an experiment after several broken Shimano left triple shifters).

I use 36/48 front with 12 -32 on the back. I put a 12 - 36 on the back for loaded touring. Not had to walk on the last few tours, but occasionally had to walk when I had a touring triple on anyway.


I don't understand that.
On the Vaya's I currently ride a 26-36-46 triple on one and a 26-34-46 on the other,with the same 8sp 14-17-19-21-23-26-28-32 custom cassettes on the three wheel sets I have for both bikes,which is lower than your double set up and gives nice two tooth gaps in the cruising range,with an ''overdrive' top for when I'm feeling frisky :) .
If the cassette were a 9sp I'd slot a 16 or 15t cog between top and the 17t one.
If I wish I can make a 14-34 cassette and swap the 26t inner for a 24t which would give me house side climbing gears should I need them.
The Kona DewDrop currently has a 13-15-17-19-21-23-26-30 cassette and a 22-32-44 MTB chainset giving the same gear range but closer gaps throughout the range,if I fitted a 14-34 cassette on it things would get really low.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
User avatar
honesty
Posts: 2658
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 3:33pm
Location: Somerset
Contact:

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by honesty »

reohn2 wrote:If you're using Shimano I'd urge to to look at a 24/34/44 chainring triple,it will work with road STI's and a road front mech or a friction lever and a road or MTB f/mech.With an MTB cassette 44x11 is a big enough top gear for most folks.
I'm even more sceptical of a 1x11 than I am of a 2x11 :? the range is there,but the gaps must be atrocious in the cruising gear range :shock: .I think we should remember that MTB riding isn't the same a touring where huge gap in ratios are(for me at least)quite unpleasant to say the least and that's before we consider chainlines and resultant drivetrain wear


I have a deore chainset at the moment and when I need to chain the chainrings I am going to put 22/32/44 rings on it definitely.

Id like to give it a go. I had a short ride on my brothers mountain bike and it seemed reasonable.
User avatar
andrew_s
Posts: 5795
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 9:29pm
Location: Gloucestershire

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by andrew_s »

MartinC wrote:Using current SRAM components (mixing Road, MTB and CX as desired) you can readily create a 10 or 11 speed double or single transmission that will have the range and number of useful ratios as a 9 speed triple.

The trouble with this sort of statement is that you are comparing a customised double with a standard off-the-peg triple. What may be news to you is that you can customise triples too, and you'll find your already customised double has already used all the possible changes if you then try to match the triple.
andrewjoseph
Posts: 1420
Joined: 17 Nov 2009, 10:48am
Location: near Afan

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by andrewjoseph »

reohn2 wrote:
andrewjoseph wrote:I've got sram APEX on my bike (an experiment after several broken Shimano left triple shifters).

I use 36/48 front with 12 -32 on the back. I put a 12 - 36 on the back for loaded touring. Not had to walk on the last few tours, but occasionally had to walk when I had a touring triple on anyway.


I don't understand that.


I'm sorry, what is it you don't understand? You don't seem to have asked a question, just stated your equipment and usage. I'm not getting at you, just don't know what you don't understand. :wink:

I've broken several Shimano left sti shifters on my road bikes. Not broken (through normal use) a sram mtb shifter in over 15 years. I thought to give sram road a try.

It does not give the range of the triples I was using previously, even with the 36 t on the back. But with the triple I sometimes had to walk up 15%+ hills when fully loaded.

Usually the main reason for walking was my wife couldn't get her loaded bike up steep hills, so I walked with her.

Since getting the sram we've not toured up steep hills (from South Wales valleys to isle of Wight), so have found the sram with 36 t to be fine fully loaded.

I swapped back to 32 t when back home.

I should also mention, I'm still using the impact triple crank with only 36/48 t rings. The APEX crank won't fit my frame.
--
Burls Ti Tourer for tarmac
Saracen aluminium full suss for trails.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by reohn2 »

andrewjoseph
You seemed to be saying you couldn't get low enough gearing with the triple hence my list of gearing.
My fault I think for not seeing your bigger picture.
I don't use STI's on solos these days preferring Kelly's but that's not due to failure,in fact I've yet to suffer any kind of breakdown on 7/8 or 9sp Shimano road STI's,other than a broken strand in the lever which caused some shifting issues,until I figured out what it was and dried out grease in the lever which is easily solve with a good squirt.
But I take your point if you've had trouble in the past.

Sorry if it seems I was taking a poke,it wasn't meant that way.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
tatanab
Posts: 5033
Joined: 8 Feb 2007, 12:37pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by tatanab »

reohn2 wrote:
honesty wrote:I'm even more sceptical of a 1x11 than I am of a 2x11 :? the range is there,but the gaps must be atrocious in the cruising gear range
I do not think so. For the last 3 summers I've toured on 2x10. The big ring is 40 and the sprockets are 12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,24 28. My cruising gears are the 15,16,17 which give me gears of 72, 68, 64. I see no big jumps. The big ring gives me gears in the range 90 to 40 which was my entire touring range a couple of decades ago, except now I have sequential gears and no overlaps. My little ring is 24 if I need it. My entire gear range is the same as I have on other machines 3x8 but with gears closer together and without double changes.

I have considered building an SRAM machine as 2x10 but I do not like the double tap levers versus Ergo, and I've heard of reliability problems at the lower end of the range. So, perhaps sometime in the future.
NetworkMan
Posts: 727
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 11:13am
Location: South Devon

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by NetworkMan »

hamster wrote:
NetworkMan wrote:
Certainly the Stronglight and Sugino compact doubles are 104 BCD which limit the minimum ring size to 34T


Not so, minimum with 110pcd is 33T, there are plenty 104 BCD MTB cainsets with 32T, I think the minimum is 30T.


Sorry, I should have written .... compact doubles are 110 BCD....

Stronglight don't offer anything less than 34T in 110 BCD. Who does?
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by reohn2 »

tatanab
Whilst 90in is as big as I need these days,and the low end is within an inch of mine,your gears aren't too wide either but the middle ring has it's uses as the 'go between',the halfway house that keeps a good chainline,larger chain wrap and an extra set of ratios to go at,it also avoids changing between the two extreme ring differences thereby avoiding multiple rear changes.
I don't need to double change(front and rear) that often due to only a 10t (or 12 at most) difference in chain rings.
I only have one overlap which can be useful rather than a nuisance(4th on the inner ring and bottom on the middle ring).
But the progression is gradual across the range due to the third ring.
Whatever suits the individual,but I've tried the Alpine double(with 8 and 9sp) and found it lacking for me.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
NetworkMan
Posts: 727
Joined: 25 Aug 2014, 11:13am
Location: South Devon

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by NetworkMan »

R2,
What is Alpine double? Is that 110/74?
tatanab
Posts: 5033
Joined: 8 Feb 2007, 12:37pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by tatanab »

reohn2 wrote:Whatever suits the individual,but I've tried the Alpine double(with 8 and 9sp) and found it lacking for me.
My triples are 48/36/24 so similar to yours. Yet I prefer my 40/24 small ringed double. As you say - we have to find what suits us individually. At least we have both tried the options.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by reohn2 »

NetworkMan wrote:R2,
What is Alpine double? Is that 110/74?

Think wide range double,could be 110/74 but others are available.

BTW Middleburn are a top notch UK chainset manufacturer:- http://www.middleburn.co.uk/products/cr ... ng-cyclo-x
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
andrewjoseph
Posts: 1420
Joined: 17 Nov 2009, 10:48am
Location: near Afan

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by andrewjoseph »

r2,
I didn't think you were poking me. :D
--
Burls Ti Tourer for tarmac
Saracen aluminium full suss for trails.
MartinC
Posts: 2127
Joined: 10 May 2007, 6:31pm
Location: Bredon

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by MartinC »

Sorry, been away most of the week. There's been a few questions off the back of my post about SRAM doubles. To try and explain better what I mean let me try and do it from my requirements. I emphasize that their mine YMMV.

First off I'm talking about touring not sport or around town. I need a range of gears from just below 2 metres up to 8 metres (I know some of you prefer gear inches rather than roll out but I don't ride ordinaries :D ). I also need them at about .5 metre intervals as far as possible. Bigger than that leaves too big a gap in effort and smaller is only necessary for the fine tuning needed when the priority is to go as fast as possible. This too me is where Rohloff have got it exactly right.

So if we say 1.5m to 8m that means I need 14 gears ( I can't ride 1.5 'cos it's too small for me, 1.8 or 1.7m would do fine ). Allowing for chain crossing and duplicates a 3x7 transmission gives me that already. 3x8 and 3x9 just gives me more of nothing, 3x10 gets to be a nuisance because a 1 sprocket change often doesn't produce the difference I want.

For me a 44-32-22 chainset with an 11-34 9 speed cassette is crazy. There's far too many low gears that are far too close to each other and at the other end there's an enormous gap between an 11 and a 13 sprocket.

My ideal touring set up could be a 7 speed triple. 48-38-28 and 13-34 for loaded touring and a 13-30 unladen. A 7 speed 135mm hub is a wonderful thing too with very little dish. Problem is that quality 7 speed stuff is hard to find now. Even if you went with friction levers hubs are hard to find.

If you want to render the same with contemporary components a triple doesn't make sense. There's far too many gears for a start. If you want off the shelf ( with drops ) then neither C or S offer the range you want. If you want to mix road and MTB stuff then front mechs are a problem area ( and rears too as quality 9 speed stuff disappears).

So a super compact set up reccomends itself. With 10 speeds upwards and more flexible chains it can easily give the range and gaps I specified above. A mix and match of SRAM road and MTB will give it to you off the shelf. If you don' t want an MTB chainset then this is possible. Several niche manufaturers make 46-30 chainsets. Sugino make one thar goes smaller. A TA or Middleburn set up where with different spiders allows you to make what you like. Putting custom rings on the inner and middle of standard cranks does too.

I accept that at the extremes a triple might have a greater range - if someone's got a 54-38-22 triple to work it would be hard to match. But for more mundane cases it's true. I need 14 gears not 30 so a triple offers nothing here over a double. The downside of 50-34 compact in putting the chainring change right in the middleof the most used gears doesn't apply - you've split into a high set and a lower set of gears.

So, yes, using SRAM for touring makes perfect sense.
slowcoach
Posts: 24
Joined: 18 Jul 2007, 2:42pm

Re: SRAM for Trouring

Post by slowcoach »

Just to echo what reohn2 and tatanab have posted - a couple of years ago I bought a bike with a 50/34 compact double and soon realised that it wasn't a good mix with old legs and steep hills, so modified it to 46/34 with an 11-34 9 speed cassette. It worked OK and was low enough for some (very) light touring.

Then a few weeks ago I bought a 48/36/26 Deore crankset and 11-32 cassette on impulse, after a few drinks. It's a a revelation. The overall range isn't that much greater but the key difference is that the 30” to 90” gears I use for 80% of the time are all on the middle cog. Much more relaxing to shift the cassette & only switch the front cog occasionally. This is especially true on rolling hills.

I guess the lesson I take from this is if possible set up the main gear range to minimise front derailleur changes. For racing bikes a 50/34 double may be perfect but for touring/commuting/normal life the range of a triple or 40/24 is far more useful & should really be the default build, rather than pretending we are all Wiggo.
Post Reply