LCP

Easton release new Gravel Shifting Rings with 2x chainrings specifically for gravel and adventure bikes

Author block

Rachael Wight's picture

Previously Editor here at off-road.cc, Rachael is happiest on two wheels. Partial to a race or two Rachael also likes getting out into the hills with a big bunch of mates. In the past Rachael has written for publications such as, Enduro Mountain Bike Magazine, Mountain Biking UK, Bike Radar, New Zealand Mountain Biker and was also the online editor for Spoke magazine in New Zealand too. For as long as she's been riding, she has been equally happy getting stuck into a kit review as she is creating stories or doing the site admin. When she's not busy with all the above she's roasting coffee or coaching mountain biking in the Forest of Dean. 

3 comments

5 years 11 months ago

John Stevenson wrote:

 

 

Joules1975 wrote:

 

Either Shimano/Sram need to produce front mechs that are designed for smaller rings/bigger percentage difference between the rings (a road mech with a mount bike cage?), or people should look at providing 44-30 or 46-32 in road bike cranksets.

 

Or there's this:

http://www.interlocracing.com/shifters-derailleurs/sub-c-front-derailleur-double

 

Maybe, but it looks to be the older cable pull ratio (i.e. not newer 105, ultergra, DA compatible).

5 years 11 months ago

Joules1975 wrote:

Either Shimano/Sram need to produce front mechs that are designed for smaller rings/bigger percentage difference between the rings (a road mech with a mount bike cage?), or people should look at providing 44-30 or 46-32 in road bike cranksets.



Or there's this:

http://www.interlocracing.com/shifters-derailleurs/sub-c-front-derailleur-double
5 years 11 months ago

I think this is great - in the same way that few 'normal' riders need 53-39 or similar, compact is also not appropriate for many, particularly given that triple rings are less available.

That said, I've run 46-30, and although the 16T difference is in theory within what front mechs can deal with, the percentage difference between the rings means that in reality things don't quite function as they do with 50-34 or similar (i.e. 32% difference between 34 and 50, where-as 35% difference between 30 and 36).

The result is that the gap feels much bigger, and mech alignment is never quite right (chain rub is much mor of an issue) and in small-small (yes I know...) the chain can catch on the outer ring.

Either Shimano/Sram need to produce front mechs that are designed for smaller rings/bigger percentage difference between the rings (a road mech with a mount bike cage?), or people should look at providing 44-30 or 46-32 in road bike cranksets.