Specie developing chain-braker - 1x10 drivetrain

Salami · Jan 5, 2011

Thread title is inaccurate the way it is worded.

Cool idea Special ed is working on though.

Santa Maria · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
Article

Insane revolution to MTB that is going to change your riding experience from the ground. Today 1x10sp drivetrain, another year of mega expensive development will bring 1x12sp drivetrain with super thin chain of alien technology.
Bring your gifts for Specie. Where would the world be without Specie? Specie on the throne!

I need to look at Lahar to calm down

what is wrong with the idea, can't get it........

StabprimoMonkee · Jan 5, 2011

Innovate or die!

Better to create self serving sensless innovations than to just let stuff be.

This has been Specialized moto forever!

Inclag · Jan 5, 2011

What's old is new again!

More ground clearance is a good thing. Nice to see this technology being applied to mountain bike drivetrains.

miuan · Jan 5, 2011

They want us to buy new drivetrain every year. For my MTB's, no thanks. However, I'd like to see a 9t cog on my road e-bike that travels at over 60kph. Do they make it in old school freewheel cassette that fits my RH205 motor?

zdubyadubya · Jan 5, 2011

I dig it. I really really want the 6-sp drivetrain they showed off on the proto '11 demo and would love this setup for my trailbike. No more front derailleurs, yay!!

norbar · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
I can't get what they intend to achieve with this.

uphillable 1x10 bikes? Actually it's a quite good idea. If you live close to a hill that has no lift but want to ride it slap a 1x10 on your bike and you have a nice do it all bike without all that double ring hassle.

Though wasn't sram doing a 1x10 12-36 casette?

slyfink · Jan 5, 2011

I hate to say it, but I was looking at a new crankset for my 2005 Enduro and noticed the Race Face Evolve Single crankset. I thought that it would pair nicely with a 10sp 36-11 cogset. Any thoughts from the monkey?

I am currently running 28-36t on my cranks with a 34-11 cogset, but I'm running into chainsuck issues. The upshifts are fantastic, but the downshifts can be problematic. I was thinking of lightening the bike a bit with a new crankset, and wondered if a single ring setup in the front, and a 36-11 would be adequate, and then this article on PB shows up... hmmmm...

I wonder what the 1x10 would do to chain line, and chain life. I think with a 32 on the cranks and a 36 on the cogs, I could get up the steepest stuff I ride, and I'm not too bothered by the higher gears, when it gets to those speeds, I'll typically just be coasting.

things that make you go hmmm...

edited to add: any thoughts on a good single ring tensioner/guide? would the Black Spire Stinger be adequate/appropriate?

norbar · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
I visit bike parks very sporadicaly because I'm definetely not going to spend all my free money for lift tickets. Actually I enjoy loooong, few kilometers long uphills that take you to the 1300m and give you juicy and demanding downhills. I've been riding Rune with SLX 2ring and 9sp casete since june 2010 and I haven't had any problems neither in uphill nor in downhills.

Such a wide movement angle will increase chain wear AND cause useless wear to rear derailer pivots. Thing that we must get rid of is the facky rear derailuer.

SRAM should have worked on combo of their HammerSchimidt and i9 gear hub. That would be improvement. This way we (riders) are only improving income fo manufacturers.

I never understood complains on the rear derail wear. Yes you can rip it off easily but that happens max once a season. Wear takes longer. What's the problem with changing it once 2-3 years if you don't rip it off? I'm all pro gearboxx but for different reasons. Please don't use that fixie pixie bikes reasoning.

Inclag · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
I visit bike parks very sporadicaly because I'm definetely not going to spend all my free money for lift tickets. Actually I enjoy loooong, few kilometers long uphills that take you to the 1300m and give you juicy and demanding downhills. I've been riding Rune with SLX 2ring and 9sp casete since june 2010 and I haven't had any problems neither in uphill nor in downhills.

Such a wide movement angle will increase chain wear AND cause useless wear to rear derailer pivots. Thing that we must get rid of is the facky rear derailuer.

SRAM should have worked on combo of their HammerSchimidt and i9 gear hub. That would be improvement. This way we (riders) are only improving income fo manufacturers.

And your 2 front rings gives a wider movement angle than 1 no?

ebarker9 · Jan 5, 2011

I'd love this. Currently running a 9 speed 12-34 cassette with a 32 tooth chainring and an E.13 XCX on the trail bike. Works really well, but it would be nice to have this combo with the additional spread of a 9-36 cassette.

Sandwich · Jan 5, 2011

I _HATE_ narrower gear spacing.

I guess I'm the only person in the world that doesn't mind front derailleurs that much. Especially if I can continue to run a 9 speed cassette with slightly narrower ratio spread then three rings up from to maximize range. Until we figure out an acceptable gearhub, yawn. Narrower is not better for dirt riders.

Dogboy · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
1, side load on the chain is approx. 2x higher than in 2x9 configuration.

How did you calculate this? Are you assuming that you only use gears 1-5 on the rear with the small chainring and gears 5-9 on the rear with the large chainring?

norbar · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
1, side load on the chain is approx. 2x higher than in 2x9 configuration. It will not only cause play in chain link pivots thus speeding up the chain wear, but the chain will place higher forces on derailuer pivots.
2, the bike category they intend to use it for experiences pretty nice amounts of chain pull (pedalkick back), and it increases with decreasing front chainring.

Well, to change rear-derailuer once a year or two is not OK for me.

For anyone that crashes it's normal. After a 1-2 year period your derail is done not due to forces but due to direct hits.

w00dy · Jan 5, 2011

Hope has a proto freehub replacement with similar range.
They had it on display at the shows last fall.

Coming from BMX where 9t drivers are common I can comfortably say this is a terrible, sh!tty idea. The smaller cog puts a TON more tension on the chain. This is a bad idea on a heavy overbuilt bmx chain. It's damn near suicidal on a 10sp chain. You wouldn't be able to replace your chain fast enough to keep up with the stretch.

Delimeat · Jan 5, 2011

Regarding side loads on the chain, if your chain line is set properly it won't be any worse than a standard single ring setup. The cogs take up the same amount of room, there just happens to be a 9 tooth'er thrown in there. I've yet to break a 10 speed chain. I don't believe that skinnier = weaker, within reason. I don't know if I'd even worry about the extra efficiency loss in the drivetrain when in the 9t cog either... I'd only be in it when going mach chicken on a downhill.

I think that there's too many pluses to ignore the 9t cog possibility.

4130biker · Jan 5, 2011

w00dy said:
Coming from BMX where 9t drivers are common I can comfortably say this is a terrible, sh!tty idea. The smaller cog puts a TON more tension on the chain. This is a bad idea on a heavy overbuilt bmx chain. It's damn near suicidal on a 10sp chain. You wouldn't be able to replace your chain fast enough to keep up with the stretch.

Good point...
I suppose team Monster can afford to replace chains very frequently, just like the dt rims :O

captainspauldin · Jan 5, 2011

4130biker said:
Good point...
I suppose team Monster can afford to replace chains very frequently, just like the dt rims :O

It's not like they are paying for chains and rims, I'm sure DH bikes put far less stress on chains than pretty much any other bike.

yopaulie · Jan 5, 2011

The problem I see with 10 speed is that if and when your derailer gets a bit "tweaked" you will start to get ghost shifts in the middle cogs, and you will have to buy a new derailer....so it basically shortens the life of the derailer.

Delimeat · Jan 5, 2011

10 speed shmenspeed, it's the damn 9 tooth cog that has got me excited. Some copy pasta:

So what does all this talk mean? Well, the real story here is the addition of the 9 tooth cog to the mix. The 9 tooth cog allows the rider to use a single smaller chainring (say a 28 or 30 tooth ring) as opposed to a double ring setup to eliminate all of those redundant gearing options, but also even broaden the gearing range. For example, a common 24 tooth ring and 36 tooth cog combo gives you a rollout of 1.52 meters, but a 28 tooth ring and 36 tooth cog would give you 1.67 meters... a pretty damn close easy gear. But on the other end a standard 32/11 combo gives you a max rollout of 6.26 meters compared to a 28/9's 6.7 meters.

Less **** to go wrong when compared to a double ring setup (hopefully), but a similar gearing range.

demo 9 · Jan 5, 2011

I cant even get a 8 speed to shift properly for more than a month, now 12 :panic:

captainspauldin · Jan 5, 2011

Delimeat said:
10 speed shmenspeed, it's the damn 9 tooth cog that has got me excited. Some copy pasta:

So what does all this talk mean? Well, the real story here is the addition of the 9 tooth cog to the mix. The 9 tooth cog allows the rider to use a single smaller chainring (say a 28 or 30 tooth ring) as opposed to a double ring setup to eliminate all of those redundant gearing options, but also even broaden the gearing range. For example, a common 24 tooth ring and 36 tooth cog combo gives you a rollout of 1.52 meters, but a 28 tooth ring and 36 tooth cog would give you 1.67 meters... a pretty damn close easy gear. But on the other end a standard 32/11 combo gives you a max rollout of 6.26 meters compared to a 28/9's 6.7 meters.

Less **** to go wrong when compared to a double ring setup (hopefully), but a similar gearing range.

I'm with you.. It could be a 9 speed and I'd feel the same way, it's about the 9T cog, forget the fact that the prototype is a 10spd..

w00dy · Jan 5, 2011

captainspauldin said:
I'm with you.. It could be a 9 speed and I'd feel the same way, it's about the 9T cog, forget the fact that the prototype is a 10spd..

I'm glad you think 10 speed is stupid, but the 9t cog is as bad or worse for longevity.

Delimeat · Jan 5, 2011

w00dy said:
I'm glad you think 10 speed is stupid, but the 9t cog is as bad or worse for longevity.

How often would you be in the 9t though? I can't argue that it would surely wear faster than a bigger cog, no doubt about that, but I doubt you'd be in it all the time even with a smaller front ring.

I wonder if some sort of material hardening could be employed. Don't gears in cars get that sort of treatment?

Transcend · Jan 5, 2011

Gears in cars get Kashima a lot of the time, actually.

You wouldn't spend much time in 9t, and you don't pedal nearly as much as a trail bike. I don't see why everyone is up in arms. Change your chain more than once a season and you'll be fine.

Pepper Brooks · Jan 5, 2011

It's because specialized can't design a bike that easily accepts a front derrailur, so they are going this route. (not that I'm against this, I actually think it will be a nice way to gain ground clearance and shave weight.)

Transcend · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
But this idea is aimed at trail bikes, isn't it? Or since when DHers need 10sp? What am I supposed to do with 'old' chain after 5 months when I shall replace it with new one because it does well to fancy modern drivetrain? If their idea of progress is a regular exchange of chain, derialuers, chainrings, casette then .... no, thanks.

I see ground clearance as another marketing chime for majority of consumers because most of them simply don't need that much clearance under BB. And if you come to need it, you simply overcome it by learning some riding technique. Without paying for extra chains. But yes, the machine must go on.

A 5 month old chain is well past it's recommended life cycle if you ride a decent amount...

let me guess, you run chains and cassettes for multiple season, until they break, and wonder why your shifting is wonky? Chains stretch rather quickly if you are riding a lot, and need to be replaced, end of story. 8spd, 9spd, 10 spd etc.

OGRipper · Jan 5, 2011

Strange thread, neat idea. I don't see why people are getting worked up about it. I'd like a 9 tooth cog on pretty much all my bikes. I still run a triple on my trail bike because I never get a big enough gear with an 11 when I try a double couple with an 11 tooth cog. A 9-toother might do the trick and in that case a 2x9 or 2x10 would make more sense than it does now.

Delimeat · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
I see ground clearance as another marketing chime for majority of consumers because most of them simply don't need that much clearance under BB. And if you come to need it, you simply overcome it by learning some riding technique. Without paying for extra chains. But yes, the machine must go on.

Good to hear that someone out there is still shredding hard on their modified beach cruiser... or have you upgraded? Things move on, we get faster and the bikes also let us go faster.

Edit: forgot the smiley

Sov · Jan 5, 2011

Great idea for trail bikes imho - I don't understand the negativitiy in this thread. 9-36 with a 28 or 30 up front would be perfect for me.
- Massive range, making the front derailleur redundant
- You can run a chain guide.
- Potentially more ground clearance
- Manufacturers can optimise suspension for a single chain ring rather than having to compromise to allow a granny ring to be used
- Less weight, less cables and bar clutter etc.

The only thing is that you can't get smaller middle rings than 32t on a 4x104 crankset. New standard anyone? Or maybe space the drive side crank outboard and use the granny ring position.

norbar · Jan 5, 2011

fluider said:
But this idea is aimed at trail bikes, isn't it? Or since when DHers need 10sp? What am I supposed to do with 'old' chain after 5 months when I shall replace it with new one because it does well to fancy modern drivetrain? If their idea of progress is a regular exchange of chain, derialuers, chainrings, casette then .... no, thanks.

I see ground clearance as another marketing chime for majority of consumers because most of them simply don't need that much clearance under BB. And if you come to need it, you simply overcome it by learning some riding technique. Without paying for extra chains. But yes, the machine must go on.

I love the technique argument. Would you suggest pro riders improve their technique - because they also bash they rings often.
The idea is also perfect for megaavalanche. Have you ever tried to ride that track. You NEED clearance there. Same for mountain of hell. You also need all the gears but a proper single ring cg is very usefull as the track is ROUGH.

On the rest I'm with Fraser here. I tend to keep my chains long on dh bikes because I don't pedal that much and my derails are always quite beaten but for trailbikes - changes are worth it.

BOOMSLANG · Jan 5, 2011

Think of it this way:

A standard triple drivetrain has about a 500% range of gears.
A typical double has about a 400% range.

The steps between a typical cogset are about 8-18%.

This means there are actually only about 14 gears needed to run a full range of gears. This is pretty much what the Rohlhoff hub achieves.

With this 9-36 cogset, you have about a 300% range with a single chainring up front. That is enough for many people.

As far a wear, friction, etc - that is exactly why we do prototypes. So far so good. Production is not a forgeone conclusion by any means.

Sam B · Jan 5, 2011

Sov said:
Great idea for trail bikes imho - I don't understand the negativitiy in this thread. 9-36 with a 28 or 30 up front would be perfect for me.
- Massive range, making the front derailleur redundant
- You can run a chain guide.
- Potentially more ground clearance
- Manufacturers can optimise suspension for a single chain ring rather than having to compromise to allow a granny ring to be used
- Less weight, less cables and bar clutter etc.

The only thing is that you can't get smaller middle rings than 32t on a 4x104 crankset. New standard anyone? Or maybe space the drive side crank outboard and use the granny ring position.

Exactly. I have been running 32 front with 11-36 10 speed rear for a few months now and love it for the trails here. But it would be sweet to be able to go up/down from the 32 easily if I was riding somewhere else. Super tech BC cross country and I might want a 30 front for the climbs, go down to Bend and I would be spun out a lot with my current gearing. And I am definitely spun out riding the road to the trails, but that is no big deal.

A direct threaded spider with a smaller BCD would be sick. No two part chainring bolts, just undo 4 screws swap sizes and adjust your LG1 style guide a little. But on the other hand... 30x9 is pretty close to 36x11 and you aren't missing much on the low end with a 30x36 even compared to a double with a 24 inner. So maybe a smaller BCD is all we really need if this 9-36 spread takes off.

JCL · Jan 5, 2011

Pepper Brooks said:
It's because specialized can't design a bike that easily accepts a front derrailur, so they are going this route.

Yeah I'm sure they're just floored by the FD mounting problem :rofl:

Specie developing chain-braker - 1x10 drivetrain

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Monkey

Monkey

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Pig my fish!

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

In heaven there is no beer

Monkey

PM me about Tantrum Cycles!

intrigued by a pole

Monkey

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

intrigued by a pole

In heaven there is no beer

Monkey

My Nuts Are Flat

Chimp

Monkey

My Nuts Are Flat

back alley ripper

Monkey

Chimp

KESSLER PROBLEM. Just cause

Chimp

Monkey

Monkey