do they think we're dumb? well i suppose they do.

ok, follow my logic here.

mountain bikes traditionally have had 3 chainrings up front, 7, 8, 9, 10 sprockets at the back.

assuming you bought a new bike in the last say 2 ish years it would have had 18, 20, 27 or 30 gears on it, these gears would have let you ride most things

then you picked up a magazine, probably singletrack or mbuk, they told you your bike was heavy, it needed streamlining.

remove your front mech and shifter and 1 or 2 chainrings . . . . it's better, it's smoother, it's lighter . . . . and it's cooler

you'll need to buy a narrow wide chainring though as chain devices are so last year

hmm . . . go out for a ride, god i miss my inside ring, i can't climb that steep hill anymore

don't worry we have an extra big cassette replacement sprocket for you, a 40/42, you can climb anything with that.

hmm . . . but now my rear shifting sucks

don't worry we have a "rad cage" for your rear mech, this means your mech can now cope with the massive sprocket you just put on.


so to recap,

you have gears that work, you took them off, you then bought a specific chainring and paid alot for it, you then bought an extra single sprocket and paid a fortune for it, it then didn't work great so you bought an extra bit to make it work.

now correct me if i'm wrong but isn't that really dumb? (or really clever of the design/marketing guys?)

:facepalm:

Pretty much.
Magazines have to go along with it to keep the advertisers happy.
Surely when you get to the bottom of a descent and the track starts climbing immediately (most trail centres I've been to seem to have this) you have to up shift up most of the rear cassette otherwise you stall. With the old 3x9 system you can shift down at the front with one click (or maybe two) which immediately reduces the ratio drastically, or if needed you can change up at the back at the same time.

Re:

so it's not just me that thinks it's stupid then?

i can understand singlespeed, super fit people with a personal issue for hurting themselves, ok

downhillers, they use a chain device and a very specific bike so single ring makes sense.

but xc? the bike by it's definition is a jack of all trades, it's designed for going up and down hence the wide range of gears, so they have convinced the masses that you buy a bike with gears then pay a load of dosh to make the bike less usable for most people but be happy that you've paid more to make it less usable.

:facepalm:

1) You have a bike, with wheels.
2) You picked up a Magazine... "nah, those wheels are so last year; you want the latest newest bigger heavier ones on a brand new frame".
3) They have cheap tyres & tubes; so you buy new ones - in the process selling all your 26" 'outdated junk'.
4) The wheels are still heavy - so you upgrade.
5) You want to keep them as 'spares' so you buy new tyres and tubes..
6) You picked up a Magazine... "nah, those wheels are so last year; you want the latest newest bigger heavier but slightly smaller than last year's ones".
Repeat Steps 3-5 (But replacing sale of 26" with 29").
7) You see the sense in Retrobike, & try to buy back all of the 26" 'junk' you got rid of 18 months ago for 3x what you sold it for
8 ) See now you're stuck trying to find a NOS M900 rear mech - which is probably where you started before you picked up that first magazine... "Hmmm, I wonder if this new kit's any better? I'll check the Magazines.."

Repeat step 1.

Re: Re:

jonnyboy666":16momovj said:

so it's not just me that thinks it's stupid then?

i can understand singlespeed, super fit people with a personal issue for hurting themselves, ok

downhillers, they use a chain device and a very specific bike so single ring makes sense.

but xc? the bike by it's definition is a jack of all trades, it's designed for going up and down hence the wide range of gears, so they have convinced the masses that you buy a bike with gears then pay a load of dosh to make the bike less usable for most people but be happy that you've paid more to make it less usable.

:facepalm:

Click to expand...

Ah yes, but an XC bike WILL have a 3x9 / 3x10 setup.. You're thinking of an 'All-Mountain / Aggressive XC / Freeride' "rig".... :roll:
(A "Rig" seems to sit somewhere between a Whippet and a Sled, it would seem...)

Re:

nope, now they're pushing 1 X whatever for xc

Re: Re:

jonnyboy666":3dyfqoly said:

nope, now they're pushing 1 X whatever for xc

Click to expand...

I am with you...however 2X10 works nicely on my modern ride...

And your LBS is meant to stock a couple of different types of each item.
Just with the new wheel sizes they new have to stock:
3x tyre sizes
3x inner tubes
3x rims
3x range of spoke lengths
3x rim tape

Re: Re:

jonnyboy666":1kb0x9ih said:

nope, now they're pushing 1 X whatever for xc

Click to expand...

Except a "proper" XC bike will have the 1x built in from day one, rather than trying to bodge it. Which is what most people are doing. As per the OP.
As with many of these things, it'd almost be cheaper and definitely quicker to sell the existing, complete 3x drivetrain and buy a new 1x drivetrain. Which would just work.

And outside of the UK it only seems to be the elite XC whippets and hardcore freeriders/DH using 1x set ups. Almost everyone else is (slowly) shifting to 2x.
FWIW there is no one in our club (200+ members) who is using 1x, except our racing snakes, riding in elite and age category events (M30), all of them regularly podium. One should really be riding internationally, but is busy with studying.
The rest of us are 2x.

And i reckon if SRAM had been able to make a front mech/chainset that actually shifted half as well as shimano, the whole 1x thing would have taken far longer to get started, and had probably less than half the market penetration, and about 1/20th the marketing budget.

Don't you understand? And so it was and so it always will be. Fountain pens (when i was at school) Bikes, Phones, car stereos, trainers...... wherever there's a market, things will always be 'improved'.

Follow you own path. 3x7 and 8 are plenty for me. Easily replaceable and fairly robust.

What would batman say?