Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

I see that the bigger cogs on the cassette are dished to follow the shape of the spokes thus being able to squeeze the extra ratio into the cassette without making the chain too much thinner.

Posted
http://www.cxmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/shimano-xtr-9000-cxmagazine-shimano-9000-xtr-sea-otter-cxmagazine-wh-m9000-tu-r12-29_std_01-e_1.jpg
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

3 x 11? isn't that a bit of an overkill?

 

Yip. Especially as you don't have SRAM's 10T and 42T out back. For reference:

http://brimages.bikeboardmedia.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1x-10-speed-11-speed-XX1-XTR-gear-ratio-comparison-chart.jpg

Posted

From the above, it looks like xtr will have 2.16mm spacing, vs. 2.53 of xx1, if I am reading the chart correctly. It makes me wonder how narrow is too narrow for a chain?

Posted

You can see that the 10cog makes a big dif in the ratios, so dropping that and then only 40 big cog just will not give nearly as much range as 10-42 , if you are running 1x.

So as a 1x setup, Shimano is a lot more limited. Sram 32 chainring gives about same ratio as Shimano 36 chainring ( if run on their respective cassettes), then Sram has 42 to match the 32 front ring, very dif from the 36 and then 40 of Shimano.

If much cheaper and even longer lasting it may be considered ( I find the 10-42 cassette already lasts twice as long as the previous XTR cassettes, also 1x11 chain lasts much longer, for me.)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout