# 2 rings, 1 cog, Melvin Tensioner



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

I'll be away from a month and I'm taking my SS with me. I'll have about a 10km urban commute to the trailhead and the 32X20 will make it a loooooonnnng spin. I was thinking of running 2 rings (42X32) with the 20 in the back and a Melvin tensioner. Has anyone done this and if so, do I have anything to watch out for (if you have pictures of your setup, that would be most appreciated). The Melvin can handle up to a 20 tooth difference...
Thanks!


----------



## madonenm (Jan 13, 2004)

*Should work just fine*

I have a bike set up as a three speed in that fashion, with a 19T freewheel and a 26-33-38 up front. It works great. I have also used this same setup on a dual supension frame as well with the same great results.


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

madonenm said:


> I have a bike set up as a three speed in that fashion, with a 19T freewheel and a 26-33-38 up front. It works great. I have also used this same setup on a dual supension frame as well with the same great results.


Thanks! I'm also playing around with the idea of running a 32X20 and 38X14 parallel to see if my chain length can be the same (it sounds good in theory having equal total teeth of 52 and all but sometimes theory and reality don't coexist very well)...
Have you had any chain jumping off issues with using the Melvin or does it have pretty good spring tension to pick up the slack?


----------



## madonenm (Jan 13, 2004)

*No skiping*

I have never had any skipping or chain drop with this seup. The Paul Melvin has very high spring tension and even on a dual suspension frame (with a changing chainstay length) the setup never skiped or dropped. The only problem I have encountered with skiping has been when using Chris King Cogs. The squared off tooth profile does not lend it's self to spring based tensioners in my opinion. That said, I have not run this setup without the front derailleur, but I do use singlespeed rings for all three rings up front.

If you are using a tensioner for your current gearing the dual cog/chainring set will probably involve adjusting the tensioner every time you change it. That may make it a bit of a hassle to do the changes.



flipnidaho said:


> Thanks! I'm also playing around with the idea of running a 32X20 and 38X14 parallel to see if my chain length can be the same (it sounds good in theory having equal total teeth of 52 and all but sometimes theory and reality don't coexist very well)...
> Have you had any chain jumping off issues with using the Melvin or does it have pretty good spring tension to pick up the slack?


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

madonenm said:


> I have never had any skipping or chain drop with this seup. The Paul Melvin has very high spring tension and even on a dual suspension frame (with a changing chainstay length) the setup never skiped or dropped. The only problem I have encountered with skiping has been when using Chris King Cogs. The squared off tooth profile does not lend it's self to spring based tensioners in my opinion. That said, I have not run this setup without the front derailleur, but I do use singlespeed rings for all three rings up front.
> 
> If you are using a tensioner for your current gearing the dual cog/chainring set will probably involve adjusting the tensioner every time you change it. That may make it a bit of a hassle to do the changes.


Thanks! I have my eye on a Melvin. 
I'm currently not using a tensioner on the bike I'll be taking on my trip since the 32X20 + worn chain + ghetto eno (filed the axle a few mm's = magic ratio. I'm hoping that a 38X14 (assuming I can get the 38 ring in 110 bcd and a 14t cog) will yield the same chain length. Kinda like the Eno double design.


----------



## SIGMA (Jan 30, 2004)

*where to buy those?*



madonenm said:


> I have a bike set up as a three speed in that fashion, with a 19T freewheel and a 26-33-38 up front. It works great. I have also used this same setup on a dual supension frame as well with the same great results.


i have been looking for some odd size rings,but i thought they had to be ramped to shift with.do s.s. rings shift ok?


----------



## logbiter (Dec 30, 2003)

flipnidaho said:


> I'll be away from a month and I'm taking my SS with me. I'll have about a 10km urban commute to the trailhead and the 32X20 will make it a loooooonnnng spin. I was thinking of running 2 rings (42X32) with the 20 in the back and a Melvin tensioner. Has anyone done this and if so, do I have anything to watch out for (if you have pictures of your setup, that would be most appreciated). The Melvin can handle up to a 20 tooth difference...
> Thanks!


I was using the Melvin w/ 48/36 up front w/ absolutely no problems. sram 8spd chain. sorry, the pics were lost in a hard drive crash. 
The melvin is currently being neglected in a box whilst I'm working on another bike project.

edit-
ah found an old pic on one of my old threads w/ it in use on the commuter... 16t + schwalbe 2.35 big apple & supermoto for commute mode and I'd switch to a 20t w/ knobbies on the offroad wheelset.
http://forums.mtbr.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=97758&stc=1&d=1124540166


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

You'll have to file another 2mm off to get the 38x14 to fit. The magic CS length decreases from 17.474 to 17.395.

(or from 16.973 to 16.892)


----------



## madonenm (Jan 13, 2004)

*They shift ok...*

The SS rings shift ok...they shift a bit slower than a ramped and pined ring but still shift with out to much effort. I do use a friction shift lever instead on an indexed one but I don't think it would really make much of a difference. If you use it like I do you only shift the front rings maybe two or three times a ride anyway.



SIGMA said:


> i have been looking for some odd size rings,but i thought they had to be ramped to shift with.do s.s. rings shift ok?


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

pacman said:


> You'll have to file another 2mm off to get the 38x14 to fit. The magic CS length decreases from 17.474 to 17.395.
> 
> (or from 16.973 to 16.892)


Thanks pacman... would a 36X16 split the difference (I'm obviously trying not to have to use a tensioner)...


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

flipnidaho said:


> Thanks pacman... would a 36X16 split the difference (I'm obviously trying not to have to use a tensioner)...


Yes, 48" chain 17.427, 47" chain 16.925


----------



## Pudgerboy (Nov 17, 2006)

flipnidaho said:


> Thanks! I have my eye on a Melvin.
> I'm currently not using a tensioner on the bike I'll be taking on my trip since the 32X20 + worn chain + ghetto eno (filed the axle a few mm's = magic ratio. I'm hoping that a 38X14 (assuming I can get the 38 ring in 110 bcd and a 14t cog) will yield the same chain length. Kinda like the Eno double design.


hey flipnidaho, what make are those 'ssssweeeeeet' rear cogs with the drilled holes?


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

Pudgerboy said:


> hey flipnidaho, what make are those 'ssssweeeeeet' rear cogs with the drilled holes?


They're Surly cogs... about $22 at the LBS...


----------



## Pudgerboy (Nov 17, 2006)

thanks mate


----------



## pacman (Jan 16, 2004)

SIGMA said:


> i have been looking for some odd size rings,but i thought they had to be ramped to shift with.do s.s. rings shift ok?


They shift OK, sort of. One problem - non-SS rings have a sideways ramp to prevent the chain from falling between two rings when downshifting. I can verify that the ramp is a nice thing to have.


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

madonenm said:


> I have a bike set up as a three speed in that fashion, with a 19T freewheel and a 26-33-38 up front. It works great. I have also used this same setup on a dual supension frame as well with the same great results.


You are running three rings up front without issue? 
No shiftting problem with ss chainring?
I am assuming the rear cog is aligned to middle ring?
Chain stays on the granny or Big ring OK?

I am asking because I have the parts to build two speed (two chain ring and one cog) mt bike using the Melvin tensioner but their website states that it is designed to tolerate only 5mm (+/-2.5mm) chainline.


----------



## madonenm (Jan 13, 2004)

*Works just fine*

My setup works just fine. As I mentioned above the shifting is a little slower but works well. For it to work with the three rings the chainline needs to be aligned with the middle ring which is the ring I use most offten anyway. The Melvin does have a little float in its pulleys and handles the shifting just fine. When I set the chain length I set it so that the when on the smal ring up front the Melvin was as slack as I could get it so that it would have the full range of motion to get to the larger ring (see the photo above). I have not had any probems with the granny or big ring (maybe because the derailleur makes a good chain guide).

P.S. The largest tooth gap I have done this with was a 22-33-38 (16 tooth) so I have not tried the full 20 tooth range claimed by Paul.



SingleTrackHound said:


> You are running three rings up front without issue?
> No shiftting problem with ss chainring?
> I am assuming the rear cog is aligned to middle ring?
> Chain stays on the granny or Big ring OK?
> ...


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

madonenm said:


> My setup works just fine...


Thx.:thumbsup: Your setup has give me some new idea as to what two speed bike I will be building. I may experiment with different gear setup than yours but I really dig your three ring setup.


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

SingleTrackHound said:


> Thx.:thumbsup: Your setup has give me some new idea as to what two speed bike I will be building. I may experiment with different gear setup than yours but I really dig your three ring setup.


2X1 will just open up more trails to my SS that I can ride to instead of having to spin madly for 1 hour to get to the trailhead (or drive)...


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

flipnidaho said:


> 2X1 will just open up more trails to my SS that I can ride to instead of having to spin madly for 1 hour to get to the trailhead (or drive)...


I have been thinking of 34t/26t front x 16t rear.


----------



## madonenm (Jan 13, 2004)

*Thanks*

I still perfer my 1x1 for most of the riding I do but the 3x1 is nice for longer rides and rides into unknown country. Now I just need to get a ridgid fork for the bike pictured above and I'll be set ;-) I look forward to seeing you setup when you get it done.



SingleTrackHound said:


> Thx.:thumbsup: Your setup has give me some new idea as to what two speed bike I will be building. I may experiment with different gear setup than yours but I really dig your three ring setup.


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

madonenm said:


> I still perfer my 1x1 for most of the riding I do but the 3x1 is nice for longer rides and rides into unknown country. Now I just need to get a ridgid fork for the bike pictured above and I'll be set ;-) I look forward to seeing you setup when you get it done.


I already have and built three 1x1 ss that I ride. I am just looking to build and add another bike to my collection.


----------



## madonenm (Jan 13, 2004)

*Three!!!*

Three 1x1s!!! I like mine enough that I have considered getting a second one but three?

I just wish Surly would come out with a 1x1 setup like the KM (i.e. hanger and cable stops). If they did that all my bikes would be Surlys. My 1x1 fits me like a glove and is the best riding bike I have ever owned.



SingleTrackHound said:


> I already have and built three 1x1 ss that I ride. I am just looking to build and add another bike to my collection.


----------



## SingleTrackHound (Jul 29, 2003)

madonenm said:


> Three 1x1s!!! I like mine enough that I have considered getting a second one but three?


All steel frame. 
One built real light (21-22lbs) with Voodoo Wanga One frame and front 4" susser.
Another built fairly stout with winter riding setup (studded tires and etc). Also front 4" susser.
Last one is built with rigid both ends and ride mostly on flat pedal. 33x21 setup. Good on tired legs.


----------



## Om Flyer (Sep 18, 2005)

*36/46 X 20 29er*



flipnidaho said:


> 2X1 will just open up more trails to my SS that I can ride to instead of having to spin madly for 1 hour to get to the trailhead (or drive)...


This set-up is perfect for the trailhead ride, manual shift in 1/2 a second, done.


----------



## DrewM (Jan 8, 2007)

SingleTrackHound said:


> I have been thinking of 34t/26t front x 16t rear.


I tried running all king of single speed gearing before I settled on a Melvin. There are times I really miss the shear simplicity of my 34-21 but I ride a lot of technical climbs and a lot of my riding is truncated with road riding, so having two gears makes sense.

Right now I'm running a 24t/38t x 19t rear. Sometimes I'd like an easier gear and sometimes I'd like a harder one and sometimes I'd like one in the middle.

I've run a 24t/32t x 19t as well, which is great for all our trails but is useless on the road.

I use a bar-con shifter/front derailleur for the front rings. The bar-con shifter puts out enough force to overcome the Melvin's spring tension.


----------



## SIGMA (Jan 30, 2004)

*my mary*

Put on a Melvin,replaced the bashgaurd with a 42t ramped ring. Put on an sram twist with all the rubber shaved off you dont feel that lump in your hand. kept the stock gear for climbing and use the big ring for some extra speed on the flats and easier climbs. I wanted to use a clamp on cablestop for the derailier, but it was to long and let the cable hit the tire. Ill come with something to replace the hoseclampcablestop.


----------

