- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Is the front mech dead Sept 2018Is the front mech dying? Is there a future for the front derailleur on modern road bikes?
First published November 4, 2017
With more and more sprockets on our wheels, do we still need two chainrings up front? We take a deep dive into the pros and cons of 1X gearing.
The drivetrain on a modern road bike has evolved loads since the early days when you turned a lever to move the chain to a different sprocket. Electronics are now commonplace and cassettes with ever-wider ranges provide enough gears to tackle even the steepest mountain climbs.
Most modern road bikes use two derailleurs to move the chain across the cassette and chainset, and it works well thanks to many years of product development. We probably take them for granted. But there's a move in some parts of the cycling world to simplify the drivetrain and it threatens the future existence of the front derailleur.
The arrival of SRAM’s 1x11 drivetrain a few years ago, a gear system that ditched the front mech and instead combined a single chainring with a wide-range cassette, provided another path. Such drivetrains have become hugely popular on mountain bikes and we've seen cyclocross and gravel bikes also being specced with single chainsets in recent years. Could the same happen to road bikes?
What are the benefits of 1X gearing?
The simplicity is certainly appealing. With just one shifter, changing gear is much more intuitive than having to manage the front and rear derailleurs. For beginners, that's an obvious benefit. There’s one less component to fail as well (though front derailleur failures are rare) and on bikes designed for wider tyres, removing the front derailleur can provide additional clearance around the rear wheel and seat tube area.
Read more: Beginner's guide: understanding gears
A short history of the front derailleur
Early users of double chainsets didn't even bother with front derailleurs; they pushed the chain from the large to small chainring with their heels at the bottom of a long climb, then stopped at the top of the hill to manually lift it back to the big ring. In the 1930s, French cycle tourists began using mechanisms to move the chain, as they realised being able to change gears was useful on the flat as well as when you had a long climb ahead.
Front derailleurs of the 1930s were usually actuated by cables; rod-operated front derailleurs appeared in the 1940s, and provided very quick and efficient shifts. You had to reach down towards the bottom bracket to operate them, which looks awkward to modern riders who are used to brake/shift levers, but was reportedly quite straightforward.
Read more: First Ride: SRAM 1x Road
Since then, the front derailleur really hasn't changed much at all. It's still a basic component, comprising two metal plates that shove the chain across the chainrings, and the stiffer those plates the better the shifting. But making plates stiffer by making them thicker also adds weight, so gear makers have added ramps and pins to the chainrings, bringing a real improvement in front shifting performance. The biggest recent development has been the addition of a motor in the electronic systems made by Shimano, Campagnolo, SRAM and FSA.
The 1x charge – the industry speaks
But the cycle industry is in a great period of technological development at the moment and everything is up for change. Chainsets have evolved from triples to doubles over the years with loads of configurations available, but a definite trend towards lower ratio setups like a compact, semi-compact and most recently, sub-compact. So if lower gears are popular, why not go all the way and use a smaller single ring?
For mountain biking, a single ring chainset makes a lot of sense. Changing gears is easier with just one gear shifter, there's one less thing to malfunction, mud and ground clearance is improved, weight is lowered and suspension designers are freed from the limitations of having to factor in a front derailleur when locating pivots. And any loss in gear range is compensated for by a wide-range cassette, with SRAM’s introduction of a 10-42t cassette and more recently 10-50t with its 12-speed Eagle groupset.
SRAM has been instrumental in the popularity of single ring drivetrains, but SRAM’s Global Drivetrain Category Manager Ron Ritzler doesn’t think fans of the front derailleur need to worry just yet.
"Will the front derailleur disappear? Probably not yet as there are certain users, like some elite athletes, who need the range and the steps to perform at their best – but can it kill the front derailleur for users who spend their time in cyclocross, commuting, adventure riding and in events where fast precise single ring performance is preferred; heck yes,” he tells us.
“We still make front derailleur and 2x rings that work really perfectly, but we love the fact that there are some many people using road bikes in new ways that make 1x the right choice."
While SRAM has been cheerleading the benefits of single ring drivetrains, Shimano isn’t really embracing it. Shimano’s Ben Hillsdon says the versatility of the double ring setup is just too good to ignore.
“Essentially the front derailleur doubles the number of gear ratios available to a rider, and, therefore, gives riders smaller steps in shifting between their biggest gear and their lowest gear,” he says. “That means riders have a wider range of gears, a smoother pedalling experience and their cadence (ie leg speed) can stay constant.
“That, in turn, brings a physiological benefit as muscles and joints are saved from being overworked, which can be crucial when it comes down to the sharp end of a race. The versatility of a double-ring setup is that you can go anywhere without compromise. However, for those riders choosing simplicity, our strategy is to offer drivetrains that can be set up in many different ways for different styles of riding.”
Read more: Your complete guide to SRAM road bike groupsets
Since we spoke to Ben Hillsdon, Shimano has backtracked a little though, introducing 1X options in the GRX range of gravel bike components. Okay, a gravel bike isn't a road bike, but there's no reason you couldn't use a gravel bike transmission on a road bike as long as you can get a top gear high enough for mountain descents and sprint finishes.
In fact, that's exactly what 3T have done with their Strada road bike, which now comes in a version with Campagnolo's 1X13 Ekar components. Ekar is intended for gravel bikes, but 3T clearly don't believe in discipline boundaries, and who's to say they're wrong?
But a front derailleur gives you more gears, right?
One of the biggest advantages of the front derailleur was a big increase in the range of gears. That was an obvious advantage with a 5-speed cassette many decades ago. Over the years, the number of sprockets on the cassette has increased and is now up to 11, 12 or even 13.
Not only has the sprocket number increased, but the size of the sprockets has gone up: most racers predominantly used 12-23 cassettes a few years ago, but 11-30 is now common in the pro peloton and many sportive bikes now come with 11-34 cassettes.
Of course, removing one of the chainrings reduces your available range so to combat this SRAM introduced a whopping 10-42 cassette. It was instrumental in winning over mountain bikers as it was possible for a single ring drivetrain to offer nearly the same gear range as a conventional compact drivetrain.
Read more: SRAM Rival 1 review
How does a single ring drivetrain compare to a conventional drivetrain? Favourably, if you look at the numbers. Combine a 44-tooth single chainring with an 11-36 cassette and you have a gear range from 33 to 108 inches. That’s very nearly the same as the 32.8 to 122.7 range that a 50/34 and 11-28 setup provides, a setup many riders still use, though the latest off-the-peg bikes tend to have an 11-32 or 11-34 cassette.
You can adjust the size of the chainring and the cassette to tailor that gear range to suit the geography of your local terrain and riding style, whether solo touring rides or racing, much like you modify a current drivetrain with different chainsets and cassettes depending on whether you want top-end for racing or low-end for riding in the mountains.
While the gear range compares favourably, where the 1x setup falls short is in the jumps between the gears. This will concern those cyclists who like to be in the perfect gear for the optimum cadence at all times. How big a concern the larger jumps between gears will be to you depends largely on the type of cyclist you are, the sort of riding you do and your terrain. There is much work being done to provide cassettes that can help smooth the transition in the most frequently used gears, with 3T's Gerard Vroomen developing two versions of a 9-32t cassette that looks to be a good choice.
So should you ditch the front derailleur?
That depends. There are clear advantages and disadvantages to a 1X drivetrain at present. It’s unlikely we’ll see the front derailleur confined to the history books anytime soon, especially given Shimano’s dominant position in the market. That'll certainly be the case for regular road bikes and especially race bikes where tradition rules.
Where we're seeing single ring drivetrains really start to become a lot more popular is on bikes where the disadvantages are outweighed by the advantages offered by a simplified drivetrain, where the ultimate range isn't as critical and where the bigger jumps aren't as much of an issue.
Read more: Will your next bike be a gravel bike?
We’re talking about cyclocross bikes (where many racers have been going single ring for many years already with home-brewed solutions) and the gravel and adventure bike category where 1X is as common a transmission option as 2X. But with the likes of the 3T Strada and Whyte Wessex One, two road bikes designed around 1x11 drivetrains, we could be looking at more road bikes devoid of front derailleurs in the future.
Ultimately, though, the modern double-chainring transmission is too good for many cyclists to want to make a radical change. But the rise of wide-range cassettes does provide an interesting alternative that will appeal to many cyclists, which means we might see a few less front derailleurs on road bikes in the future.
Do you ride a bike with a single ring drivetrain?
David worked on the road.cc tech team from 2012-2020. Previously he was editor of Bikemagic.com and before that staff writer at RCUK. He's a seasoned cyclist of all disciplines, from road to mountain biking, touring to cyclo-cross, he only wishes he had time to ride them all. He's mildly competitive, though he'll never admit it, and is a frequent road racer but is too lazy to do really well. He currently resides in the Cotswolds, and you can now find him over on his own YouTube channel David Arthur - Just Ride Bikes.
Latest Comments
- Daclu Trelub 11 hours 2 min ago
A bit like underarm, surely?
- hand0j1n 12 hours 17 min ago
Hopefully the new device is a big success, but wahoo do have a lot work to do in terms of convincing that their quality control has improved. ...
- chrisonabike 11 hours 7 min ago
Agree that the moaning comes from a place of priveledge and ultimately "if only there weren't so many other people driving"....
- Simon E 12 hours 52 min ago
Have added some clarification....
- Simon E 13 hours 2 min ago
I was tempted to try Galibier gloves but opted for Endura Freezing Point from LBS last year. Not cheap (£60, I think). I'd prefer a shorter cuff...
- Simon E 13 hours 40 min ago
I can't wait that long! Here's a series that any good vlogger / 'grammer would surely recognise....
- Simon E 13 hours 48 min ago
At 2.30pm on Saturday a small hatchback car "came to rest on its side in a precarious position" near the hamlet of Ratlinghope on the west side of...
- IanMK 14 hours 25 min ago
I do wonder if Highway Planners and Councils understand all the implications of putting in traffic calming measures. They certainly take no...
- Oldfatgit 14 hours 45 min ago
How long before some waste of DNA complains about them on the footpath ... or for Grimsby [and the other shit-tips] to ban them ...
Add new comment
125 comments
"While the gear range compares favourably, where the 1x setup falls short is in the jumps between the gears. This will concern those cyclists who like to be in the perfect gear for the optimum cadence at all times. How big a concern the larger jumps between gears will be to you depends largely on the type of cyclist you are, the sort of riding you do and your terrain"
As a commuter that turned roadie post Boardman it actually took me years to get the hang of this. Always had low cadence (73) ground out a big gear even up the hills. I'm gradually improving but like that I still have that psychotic tendency.
My new bike has 11 gears and the cadence difference is unreal that everything feels smoother and I can attack in different ways. My winterised bike with Claris 8 speed I seem to have made the problem worse - I added an 11-34 cassette. When you're in the big ring the jump to that last sprocket is ridiculous and you spin out, you shift back up and it's murder. It's all about the ratios (and the legs)...
Magic beans anyone?
"We still make front derailleur and 2x rings that work really perfectly..."
News to me!
"Combine a 44t single chainring with an 11-36 cassette and you have a gear range from 33 to 108 inches. That’s very nearly the same as the 32.8 to 122.7 range that a conventional 50/34 and 11-28 setup provides.....".
Well, the top end isn't "nearly the same" is it? 108 inches versus 123ish inches...... And what about all the missing ratios in between, where there are now only big jumps in cadence instead?
Mind, I don't know why your avergare MAMIL, commuter, sportive rider or anyone else not an elite racing fellow wants a 123 inch top gear. How many of us can pedal to 40mph? (No, you don't need to do so downhill as you'll go faster if your get tucked and don't disturb the air flow with your pedal thrashes).
Anyroadup, I like a double or a triple chainring to enable the closer ratios at the back. It must be my 55 years of honing the cadence, eh? Strangely I find the gear changing becomes second nature - like 1001 other human operations of mechanical stuff.
What I do find annoying is the lack of cassettes that begin with a 14 or 15 tooth sprocket and end with a 32 or 36. One must have a useless 11, 12 and 13 sprocket ... or buy two cassettes to cannabalise so the ideal sprocket range can be extracted. (Even then, the ramps on the sprockets sometimes suffer a graunch-causing mismatch).
Like the single chainring thing, 11-summick cassettes are just a fashion aping "the professionals" and/or the latest manufacturers marketing gimmick. It all makes work for the landfill attendants to do, I suppose.
Cugel
Well, you can get some of the same effect with the newer subcompact cranksets aimed at gravel bikers and cyclocrossers, or going with mountain bike chainrings....assuming your front mech mount has enough vertical adjustment.
But I do agree that there's a distinct lack of logic with Shimano's 11 speed cassette offerings. Why are virtually all them anchored with an 11 speed cog? It means you can't effectively change gearing to the terrain without either chainging front chainrings or compromising some of the utility an 11-speed setup is supposed to give you (either more top gear than you need on a flat course, or not enough top end on a hilly course).
Ideally, I'd like to have a close-ratio cassette with a 13T smallest cog for flat routes, mid-range cassette with 12T small cog for rolling routes, and a wide ratio cassette with an 11T smallest cog for hilly routes. Shimano offers nothing that meets the first requirement, and only an expensive Dura Ace cassette for the second.
SRAM's worse, offering no standard-driver 11 speed cassettes with anything other than an 11 tooth small cog.
Well, there's the other problem. On two of my bikes there's a band-on front changer that can be moved to accommodate any size chainring. There's a 34/44 on one of them. But on my other two bikes there's a "braze-on" (actually riveted-on) holder for the front changer that won't descend any lower than the height appropriate for a 50 tooth ring. It will move upwards to accommodate a 56 tooth ring, though! Who needs that!? Just that Wiggo; and a Cav.
For all the blather about how modern cycling wares offer a much greater choice than yesteryear, there is a remarkable lack of anything in the way of gearing for road bikes that suits anyone other than an elite racer able to output 400 watts all day.
The closest to my needs in 11-speed are a Shimano Ultegra 11-32 and a 14-28. Is it not obvious that they should do the other permutation of 14-32? They do an 11-28, the rascals! I had to buy two to make the one I want. Is this their cunning plan?
I had (have) the same the same problem with my bike. Why a gravel bike would need a 56t front ring is beyond me, but the front mech won't drop far enough to accommodate anything smaller than 48.
I have a 46 on there, the gap is pretty big. It mostly worked but could drop the chain when shifting under load. Clutch mech sorted it out, but shouldn't need to have done that.
Will someone make an adaptor so I can just bolt my 42 front ring onto the casette or freewheel to save any waste then?
A chap on the singletrack forum did that before the cassettes or expanders were easily bought.
I ride both, on the same bike. Both have their uses, 1x is my "off road" set up but it's fine for short road rides.
2x I use on longer road rides but works fine on dirt too, if it's faster terrain or monster climbs two gear ranges is most welcome.
What I'd like is to be able to mix and match Shimano mountain and road parts without extra doohickeys.
What would probably be more useful to casuals on road bikes would be lower overall gearing.
Didn't realise I was an elite athlete
fewer parts (but same price), more chain wear replacements, whats not to like....if you are shimano, sram etc
Nail on head Simmo and the main non-selling point for me. Currently I feel that I am getting more from a cheaper system like 2 x 11.
And an addition to the "journalists don't check anything nowadays" file:
"One of the biggest advantages offered with the introduction of the front derailleur was massively increasing the range of gears. That was an obvious advantage with a 5-speed cassette many decades ago."
Did anyone ever make a 5-speed cassette? I really doubt it. I think you might mean a 5-speed freewheel.
I don't know about 5 speed cassettes, but 6 speed was readily available with a Sturmey Archer hub and a cyclo double freewheel! So, no the 5 speed derailleur didn't massively increase the range of gears!
SRAM’s Global Drivetrain Category Manager Ron Ritzler...
"Will the front derailleur disappear? Probably not yet as there are certain users, like some elite athletes, who need the range and the steps to perform at their best – but can it kill the front derailleur for users who spend their time in cyclocross, commuting, adventure riding and in events where fast precise single ring performance is preferred; heck yes,” he tells us.
So, single ring transmissions are better in situations where, erm, single ring transmissions are preferred. Very informative, Mr Ritzler.
He didn't say they were better there, just that they could (in his opinion) 'kill' the front mech in cyclocross, commuting and adventure riding and also "in events where fast precise single ring performance is preferred".
No, yes
In the article it says "ground clearance is improved" (for mtbs). Why or how is this? A front mech is several inches above the BB, so where is ground clearance a problem?
I am anti 1x. It looks shit, and if you are so thick you need " the simplicity" of one shifter, you probably shouldn't be allowed out on your own. A semi compact chainset and 11 speed Ultegra gives me a perfect set up for riding in the UK. If I moved to the Alps, I'd get a compact.
1x for the road - you never have the right gear. You can't climb steep hills because you can't turn the pedals at 40 rpm. You can't go downhill fast (or even on the flat with favourable conditions) because you're spinning at over 120 rpm. And everywhere else you're always not quite in the right gear...
Rubs chin...
Regarding the ground clearance, is the bb the measure of this, or would we consider it to be the result of a smaller chain ring having a smaller radius because there's no need for a front mech?
Secondly, as long as you're not riding a 53/39, please don't mock the choices of others. riding up Morcuera on a 53/28 is doable, difficult and slow, but doable.
I apologise for causing offence. But I am just not having the argument that it is simpler.
1x should be renamed "Half by" and then people might have an idea about what is really going on. Gears were invented to give people options, this is the opposite of that. I've had some arguments with off-roaders about this, but I still can't see the benefit.
...but mechanically it's demonstrably simpler, isn't it ? Surely you can see that ?
Except it's not "half" the gearing, e.g. this is the gearing overlap on 52/36 with 11-28
http://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR=DERS&KB=36,52&RZ=11,12,13,14,15,17,19...
..so about 50% more gear range with a 2x setup. Here's the same setup with 46 front ring and a 11-42 cassette at the back.
http://www.gear-calculator.com/?GR=DERS&KB=36,46&RZ=11,13,15,17,19,21,24...
To me, that looks to be around 5 mis-matches which you could argue are 5 / 22 "missing" options. Ideal ? No. Half ? No, not for me.
I've 1x11 on my mtb and the cross-chain is indecent.
"Is the front mech dead?"
No.
"Is there a future for the front derailleur on modern road bikes?"
Yes.
For those of us who don't aspire to be pro-riders, don't want a dinner-plate cog out back and are happy to just enjoy our riding, then a double or triple up front 'ain't broken and don't need fixing'.
I know things move on and progress can be a good thing; indeed there have been some great developments over the last decade or so but single ring up front for everyone is not one of them.
IMO
not anti 1x have it on my shopper/gym bike and works fine, ridden 1x on hire bikes at trail centre and works fine but am puzzled by
for years all I've heard is reduce rotating mass - lighter rims, tubeless etc etc
...so where does sticking all that gearing in the rotating mass really help things or is this a bit like press fit BB's ? sell the advantages but forget the problems because it works ok for the producers?
Not pro- or anti- in general, horses for courses etc, but there's little change here. Back of fag packet says something like a Ultegra 11-28 -> XT 11-40 is about 150g and an Ultegra 36T inner ring is around 40g I believe - and take off a wee bit for a smaller big ring. Difference is smaller when comparing something like 105 -> XT or even Deore. Slight difference in mass distribution and moment of inertia with the cogs, but it's really not massive. Overall weight down a bit too as no front mech or cable but meh..
Use 1x if you like, don't if you don't - it's not worth spending much time on.
The whole rotating mass thing is largely irrelevant in the world of cycling. The difference (even at the wheel rim) is miniscule, saving 50g from your wheel rims has pretty much the same effect as saving 50g from bottle cage. People will of course argue as it's one of the great myths in cycling.
Yeah... but modern front mechs work really well and e-groups will even do compensating shifts at the rear to minimise the big jump of a front shift. I'm not seeing much of an issue to be solved for a road bike and do we really want pie-plate rear sprockets?
There isnt the range for a road bike to be truly versatile all-rounder. Yes MTB the simple setup allows just enough range to tackle most climbs/trails.
My own Tripster, I geared down to a MTB setup for primarily climbing mountains. It does this admirably with the gearing. However just recently I was left out gunned on a gradual slope where I couldn't spin any faster than 120rpm. I've fitted a larger outer chainring to bring cadence down for fast low percentage slopes but still capable of climbing mountains,.
I have a XT Di2 setup with 44-28 chainset and 11-40 cassette
Pages