First Look: The Biggest Dinner Plate Yet - OneUp Introduces 45 Tooth Sprocket for Shimano Cassettes 16

Amazing how much creativity is poured into a market that only exists because SRAM and Shimano won't make affordable 1X wide range drivetrains (SRAM's new GX 1 by drivetrain is def more affordable at ~$500 but you can pick up an slx 2x10 drivetrain for under 300 so we are still not there yet)

For the record, throwing gas on the fire is entertaining in some twisted way.

By the time you get these lard-ass cassettes bolted up and then you realize that your barely-worn single ring WILL need a chainguide in order to pound rock gardens with any haste without tossing a chain you will have saved no grams over a front derailleur and a wider gear range...

Lets just go back to 2x9 and be done with it...lighter, smaller cassettes. 11-32 cassette with 24, 36 chainrings or a 22 granny to climb any steep tech or pedal any DH. Why are we going back to making chainrings and cassettes so large?

Anyone remember the "Hyperdrive-C" revolution?

I swear other industries are laughing at the gullibility of mtb consumers and the asinine "innovations" that mtb engineering has coughed up.

Your weight whinge doesn't add up. One of the only issues with 1x11 is top speed. I think this is more about be able to run a bigger ring up front, rather than an easier climbing gear. There are a load of advantages to using 1x11 (or 1x10) over 2x whatever. I use a guide up front too, as no system is 100% reliable.

At the end of the day, you don't have to buy it. No one does.

See weight breakdown below...the weights do add up to barely any savings for a smaller range of gears.

The free-market, you-don't-have-to-buy-it push-back against bitching has to stop. Because you will have to buy it just like the 26" rim and tire selection is already dwindling...the new wide Easton rims do not come in 26", Vittoria doesn't make any 26" Trail Casing tires anymore, Spank Subrosa rims in 26" have disappeared, etc. That is just off the top of my head.

These standards are moving too fast and support for the "old" standards is dropping just as fast as these fads came flying in.

When my rims finally break a bead or my fork bushings finally slop around too much I will not buy a whole new bike. But if I can't find a fork or rim that fits my "old" standard I won't have a choice. I refuse to buy a new bike every two or even three years and you shouldn't either. But you won't have a choice at this rate so you WILL have to buy it.

Have you picked up an XX1 or XTR cassette? They are freaky light. You will lose, what, 25g by going to a more compact cassette? Sounds like a win.

I think I have lost 1 chain in a year... But I opted for not just the narrow-wide but the tall tooth ring (BlackSpire), no chainguide for me, so YMMV.

I love my 1x (with cheater ring for the big mountain days). And if you can't spin a 30t up to 30-40mph on a downhill, you don't know how to pedal at a high cadence. It just takes a quick burst and gravity takes over.

Rock your 2x. More power to you. Bikes are fun. Get over it.

P

PS: The real story is about the patent and how it might effect future innovation in 3rd party cassette development.

XX1 and XTR are always light because they are $250+ for only a cassette...that doesn't account for anything applicable to the everyman that hasn't won the lottery. Drivetrains last far longer in CA than the UK, or New England, PNW etc. so your mileage will vary greatly compared to everyone outside of the arid portions of the US.

30T will never pedal to 30, let alone 40 without Roadrunner cartoon legs. At that point you are fighting the interia of your legs more than actually moving yourself forward. 30mph maybe with a 10t small cog but most of us still have an 11t small cog and it won't get any smaller without big bucks spent. Not worth it.

As long as we have front derailleurs, we compromise the strength and stiffness of the main pivot and chainstay yoke. The drive-side main pivot bearing has to be moved way inward to accommodate the front derailleur. Ironically, that is also the bearing that receives the highest loads. If FDs are abandon in favor of one-by systems, frame manufacturers can move that drive-side bearing back outward where it needs to be and we will see a benefit in stiffness, strength, and longevity of bike frames as a result. I want that.

And just because you hate "lard-ass cassettes," doesn't mean you have to run one. Pedal around a 1x9 and show everyone what a beast you are. Mothers will shield their children's eyes, girls with throw their clothes at you, and men's giant cassettes with rust from their salty tears as you pass. If that works for you, rock it, but dammit I want more reliable frames without a weight compromise and one-by will help give us that.

I did not support 1x9 ever. I am no pedaling beast. 1x9 would ruin all my fun. My point is quite the opposite. Too many people buy into these beastly gearing options because it looks cool (my guess) but they aren't fit enough for it and have less fun and spend more money doing it.

The premise of all this new shit is what annoys me. All the geeking out over these expensive do-dads and nobody gets faster. In the case with some friends that tried 1X, they had less fun due to having to push steeps that were climbable and tossing chains during races or repeatedly broken MRP chainguides like I saw this year. And now I am seeing replacement 26" wheels and tires slowly disappearing as well as drivetrains getting heavier and more expensive for a given weight than my local riding allows. Many of us ride in mud or at least regularly moist conditions and alloy rings do not hold up when used as a primary. Alot of us want to actually ride, not push up hills that are steep enough the front tire is hard to keep down. And most of us would rather ride than have to work extra to pay for ridiculously expensive drivetrains (or new bikes compatible with brand new standards.)

To the comment regarding weight: XX1 and XTR are completely the exception and not the rule. Outside of doctors, lawyers and sponsored riders, nobody in their right mind would cough up $250+ just for a cassette. In all of all my riding and racing since 1994 I have personally known very, very few that actually ran XTR because it is too damn expensive for the every-man. Not to mention XD -driver hub expense...

Here are the weights of mortal-cost parts that people can actually afford to grind through the mud:
Shimano M770 9-speed cassette: 256g
Shimano M771 10-speed (widely used for 1x with addition of Wolf Tooth ring) 342g
Average front derailleur is 150-170g
Typical upper-only style chainguide is around 70g
XT front shifter 135g

You do the math, yes 2x will be very slightly heavier but the added range more than makes up for it.

Regarding frame stiffness...please. frames have been plenty stiff and durable for over a decade even before through-axle rear came full swing. My fatbike is rigid with 190mm rear wheel spacing and a massively-wide BB shell to clear 5" tires and has more side flex than any of my other bikes hardtail or full-suss. Frame design, material selection, thickness, and the multitude of front derailleur mounting options makes for miniscule limitations. As in: front derailleurs are barely in the way except for possibly tire clearance. Every single component between your pedals and the ground account for perceived stiffness and you are worried that a front derailleur is a main culprit? No sir.

Regarding 30+mph with a 30T up front. Seriously?. Try that on my 26" bike with an 11T smallest cog and instruct me on how I need to improve my pedaling to attain such speeds. I am seeing a comical flurry of wasted energy. Plus I occasionally want to go faster than 30 with minimal gravity assistance. What then?

Yes biking is fun. The real answer to speed and fun is to ride more and make zero excuses. No amount of bike parts will make you faster but plenty will make you have less fun and drain your $$.

Meh - who cares how fit other people are or why they buy stuff. Let's all agree that mountain bikes are rad.. with the exception of fat & boost.

I agree with lev, you aren't correct with what you are talking about as far as weight. Here's what the facts are, which are different than what you say about 'lard ass' cassettes:

We'll just assume everyone has the same crank, front 34 tooth chainring, hub, rear shifter, which all weight about the same.

2x9: XT cassette, because you can't hardly find the 9 speed XTR (256g) plus XTR shifter(102g) plus XTR front derailleur (122g) plus small chainring (30g), we'll leave off the cable and housing weight, the added chainring bolts: 510g

1Up with XTR Cassette: 396 Grams

XX1 cassette: 260 Grams. Add in a top Gamut guide (54g), which I've never lost a chain from, and you've got about a half pound weight savings from your ideal 2x setup.

I don't even care about the weight that much though, I want to know I'm never going to lose a chain, and have a quiet bike, and have fewer moving parts. Everyone should use just what you want though, which doesn't affect me one bit. Your 9 speed stuff is getting cheaper, silvbullit. That's a good thing, because you can have more money saved to upgrade your elastomer fork to Englund Air cartridges. Now that's progress.

This forum should help you out with the swap over:
http://forums.mtbr.com/shocks-suspension/englund-total-air-rebuild-instructions-368748.html

You are optimizing the hilarity of my point. You just proposed $1k+ worth of parts to save maybe a half pound and a have a smaller gear spread and less reliability due to a bunch of alloy rings that wear far faster. If you are going for more simplicity, go get a rigid single speed but don't try to say that your fancy-pants 1X made your bike simpler. You just ditched a front derailleur and shifter which were probably the two most reliable and trouble-free parts that existed on your bike. Good work! Now your bike is simple.

You missed the enitre point. The XTR or XX1 parts you refer to are astronomically expensive so they are automatically out of the realm of concern for people with normal incomes. XT or X9 stuff is the realistic high water mark for most people replacing parts.

Yes 9-speed is hard to find now. But the humor is in the weights, prices and sizes of the cassettes going up and the durability of the materials going down especially for someone who remembers reading about how awesome Hyperdrive-C was. So if you do not remember, feel free to google it.

In 1995 I put and Englund oil cartridge in my Manitou 4 which I had also modified by cutting the top-out elastomers by 1/4" and adding and extra 1/4" to the elastomer stack thank you very much. I still had bushing overlap and 2-1/4" of elastomer travel. I was also first to own a Santa Cruz Heckler in the Northeastern US in 1996 and race XC with it back then with many people wondering what I was doing. I was running 35mm wide Blunt 35 rims two years ago, etc...

The point? I have always bought into new tech that makes a tangible improvement. But now things are changing for the sake of change, profit, boredom...who knows. It isn't making faster riders but it is making poorer ones.

I've been using a 1x10 setup with SRAM x9 type 2 derailleur and a Woolftooth chainring for 3 years now without a chain drop. Don't like it, don't buy it, they are still making 2x drivetrains. Maybe I'm just a freak, but I haven't found a hill yet I could climb with my old 2x9 drivetrain that I can't climb with my 1x. I even had a Leonardi General Lee Cassette Adapter for a while (until I wore it out) but the only time I got into the 40t previously was long sustained climbs. I don't see myself personally needing more than a 40t, but I'm sure there are others that will welcome it.

And if you don't think it's innovation, just watch how much better full squish bikes will start riding in the near future.

If you're still struggling to climb with a 40t or 42t, get a damn 2x, you chain slapping hipster

is there some type of boy/girl scout merit badge being offered nowadays in the MTB world for riders who are "strong" enough to run a single ring or something??? JUST USE A 2X SYSTEM.

I wonder if the patent covers "extreme flex and sub standard shifting" ?