# When to use a Long Cage vs Short Cage Derailleur?



## Trentkc (Mar 23, 2006)

I have a new SRAM X9 long cage derailleur, and another X9 that I now realize is "not long". Both are brand new, but the short one is ~16mm shorter.

What is the proper application for long versus short cage derailleur? Will the short one work with a 11/34 cassette? Does it matter if the bike has a rear suspension or is a hardtail? 

Is my shorter X9 a "short" cage or "medium" cage? Thanks //kct


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

You've got a medium cage. Sram makes a short cage mountain derailleur in the X.0 line, but only goes as low as a medium in the X.9.

Quick answer: The medium cage will work, but you'll drop your chain if you accidentally shift to the small-small combo. Suspension *could* be a factor, depending on how much "chainstay growth" your frame experiences as your suspension cycles.

Long answer:

Derailleurs have a rated capacity. This is their ability to take up excess chain. After all, you need just about all of your chain to run in the big-big combo, whereas you have a bunch of extra links doing nothing when you run in your small-small combo.

Not that either of those cross-chain combos are normal to run in, but let me get to that in a minute.

Manufacturer stated derailleur capacities are as follows:
Shimano long = 45T; medium = 33T
SRAM long = 43T; medium = 37T; short = 30T

Speaking from experience, Shimano is a bit conservative in their capacity rating. I can only assume the same is true of SRAM (I'll get to that, too).

The easy capacity formula is to add your big ring & cog sizes, then subtract your small ring and cog sizes. It looks like this:

*cap req'd (T) = (BIG ring - small ring) + (BIG cog - small cog) *

...so for a typical 44-32-22 mountain crank & 11-34 cassette...

*T = (44T - 22T) + (34T - 11T)
.. = (22T) + (23T)
.. = 45T*

Using this simple forumla, you would need a derailleur with a 45T rated capacity to absorb all the possible extra links of a typical 27-speed drivetrain.

(I make the assumption SRAM stated capacity is conservative, since they list 43T as the long cage capacity -- 2T short of what is required by this forumla).

Where do shorter cage lengths come into play? Right here!

Even though the long cage will, in theory, take you down to the 22x11 gear combo and hold adequate chain tension, let's be logical: 22x11 is a combo you don't use!

Rather than use the generic formula, let's map out the capacity for each gear combination (based off of a Shimano cog pattern; SRAM will be slightly different):










44x34 starts off at zero because in that combo, all of the chain is being used up by the ring and cog, and the derailleur needs to take up none of it. As you shift through the cassette range (moving down the column), the amount of free chain increases as the cog size decreases.

Take a look at the useable gears, which I've outlined in green and yellow. Those fall near the stated capacity of the medium cage derailleurs. (I mentioned that Shimano's stated capacity is conservative, and in practice, I find their medium cage to be closer to 39T.)

For instance, in the middle ring (32) and the small cog (11), the table shows you've got to absorb 35T. This is near the stated capacity of either of the *medium cage* derailleurs. This gear combo remains usable, but you'd be better off shifting to your big ring for better chain tension.

You can also see that to use a SRAM *short cage* derailleur (30T capacity) on this drivetrain would leave you with two or three *un*usable gears while in the middle ring, and only about three useable gears from your granny ring. (Any number greater than 30T on the table would be near the limits of the short cage derailleur.)

Oops! Accidentally shifted into the unusable "red zone"? Nothing major: the derailleur cage folds back on itself, the chain droops, and you maybe drop the chain if you don't catch it in time.

In my opinion, it'd be stupid to size a chain any smaller than what is required to shift into big-big. If you accidentally force a shift into that combo, which is certainly possible when you're tired or "in the moment", you don't want to break anything. *So chain length will be the same no matter what derailleur you choose.*










Benefits of a shorter cage length?
- snappier shifts
- better chain tension
- less chain slap / greatly decreased drivetrain noise (!)
- better obstruction clearance / improved spoke clearance.
- slight weight loss -- but you gotta be a real weight weenie to appreciate this one.


----------



## mtb_biker (Jan 27, 2004)

As a fyi

Sram's X9 in short cage (not available to the public though yet ... pre production)


----------



## Trentkc (Mar 23, 2006)

Thanks to Speedub.Nate for an outstanding explanation! Comprehensive and well written.
//kct


----------



## cwilli01 (Jul 6, 2006)

I second that. 

Nate, you totally explained something that had mystified me. Very, very nicely done!


----------



## gthcarolina (Mar 3, 2005)

*Nate!*

I'm sitting here thinking of the same choice in XTR derailleurs. Amazingly clear, concise and helpful.


----------



## InnovateorDie (Sep 25, 2006)

How would I calculate it if I run a single 38 in the front and a 11x32 in the rear? What size derailleur would I need? I'm interested in buying a Shimano Saint for my Specialized P.2 but I'm having trouble deciding what size I should get.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

That's an easy one... go as short as you can possibly go.

See, it's not the *size* of the front chainring that factors in, but the *range* between the biggest ring and the smallest ring.

With an 11-32 in the rear, you've got a 21T spread, well within the capacity range of Shimano's short cage derailleur.

(The capacity requirement for the front rings is Zero on your setup because it doesn't change at all.)


----------



## energetix (Feb 4, 2006)

I also found this info useful some time ago -

http://www.beyondbikes.com/bb/tech/?section=rdr


----------



## Bikinfoolferlife (Feb 3, 2004)

One of the most impressive responses I've seen on these boards. Great work speedub.nate!


----------



## stan4bikes (May 24, 2006)

*one more question...*

Great explanation..but whats the diff between "rapid rise" and "non rapid rise"? thanx in advance....

'


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

"Rapid Rise" is Shimano's trademarked name for what is otherwise known as a _low-normal_ derailleur. This means spring tension pulls the chain in/up the cassette to the lowest gear, and cable action pulls it out/down to the high (small) cog.

The reverse of this is _high normal_, where the thumb press / cable pull drags the chain up the cassette towards the lowest (biggest) cog.


----------



## stan4bikes (May 24, 2006)

*thanx!*

great info..I love these forums!


----------



## xKREDx (Aug 8, 2006)

Speeddub.Nate - wow that explained so much

Thanks


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

*med cage*

I'm finding my SRAM XO med cage works great with 11-34 cog. In fact it can accommodate the extreme large-large gear combo, but as we all know, it's not recommended with full-susp bikes (chain growth upon compression). The shifts are definitely snappy, quick and precise- partly due to the shorter cage, and mostly to SRAM's shift system.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

HTail said:


> I'm finding my SRAM XO med cage works great with 11-34 cog. In fact it can accommodate the extreme large-large gear combo, but as we all know, it's not recommended with full-susp bikes (chain growth upon compression). The shifts are definitely snappy, quick and precise- partly due to the shorter cage, and mostly to SRAM's shift system.


That, and my lasting impression during my first ride after switching to a medium cage on my 1x9 (32/11-34) was how remarkably quite my bike had become.


----------



## KRob (Jan 13, 2004)

HTail said:


> The shifts are definitely snappy, quick and precise- partly due to the shorter cage, and mostly to SRAM's shift system.


Oh, so that's why my new SRAM X9 (long cage) doesn't feel as snappy as my old XTR medium cage. Also more chain slap and noise. I wondered if the medium cage X9 would handle the 34-11 rear cog with a normal triple chain ring... and apparently it will.

Thanks.


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

Again, med cage should be fine as long as you're conscious about your gear combos and follow the chain length guide measuring- large chainring to large cog + 2 links.


----------



## -cynic- (Feb 17, 2007)

Another big thanks to Speedub.Nate!!!

Its been nearly 7 months, and his outstanding tutoral still goes VERY much appreciated:thumbsup:


----------



## parkcity00 (Apr 11, 2006)

*Thanks for great info~*

wow, it's great explanation nate. I think I have to dig these forums in,,


----------



## Moo Shoo Pork (Jan 17, 2004)

*Thanks Man!*

Holy Cow. Speedub.nate awesome posts. Getting ready to replace my rear Derailleurs on one of my FS bikes. Still remember when I owned my Iron Horse HP how helpful you were to all of us in that forum. Thanks man for this post! This should be a sticky.


----------



## dwyooaj (Dec 14, 2006)

*medium cage derailleur with bashguard*

thanks for the great info. I just replaced my big ring with a bashguard (and shortened my chain accordingly). The middle ring is still 32t, and my cassette is 11-34. so it seems to me, since i need to replace my bent (xtr - goddammit) derailleur, i could go with a shimano medium cage der. My bike is a heckler / 5.6" travel. Is this correct?


----------



## 29Colossus (Jun 4, 2006)

With that answer, I believe that Speedhub.Nate could really be....

Time's "Man of the Year"

Very nice. I know it's old, but that don't change it. It also saved me from making a jackhammer out of myself with what would have been my pathetic answer.

:thumbsup:


----------



## HR2007 (Sep 22, 2006)

awsome thread, i always thought the longer the derail cage the better but maybe a med cage would work better for a 22-32 F, 11-34 R setup


----------



## Jodiuh (May 21, 2006)

I have an older RD-M951 XTR that's seen better days. Not quite sure of its cage length, but looks to be 2.75 inches between pulleys, short maybe? So w/ my current setup of an 8 speed 28-11 cassette and a 3 ring 44-32-22 giving me a capacity of 39...a Shimano RD-M960-GS needs to find a home on my Jamis, eh?

It's interesting going around LBS and seeing a bunch of long cage setup stock. Guess they don't wanna see folks breakin' stuff. 

Thanks so much for your explanation Speeddub.Nate. I even managed to create my own little "good gear" pic.


----------



## dropadrop (Sep 20, 2005)

I'm trying to figure out how having a single 34t chainring in the front would affect this.

For example I have a 34t chainring in the front, and 11-34 in the rear. As far as I can use your formula I'm getting:

(34-0)+(34-11)=34+23=57T

Seems to work fine with a short cage though. 

Great sounding explanation but it's so late it's going over my head!


----------



## dwyooaj (Dec 14, 2006)

*short cage is fine*

dropadrop-
actually your setup requires a derailleur with only a 23 tooth capacity. when you run a sinle chainring, the difference up front is zero because you're not shifting up there, (the way to think about it is: biggest ring you are running - smallest ring, and your single ring is considered to be both of these, so its 34-34 = 0) and the formula reduces to the difference between the top & bottom cogs, which is 23.


----------



## Bartj (Sep 19, 2006)

What an excellent thread. I learned a ton reading through it. I am a relatively new rider and trying figure out mechanically why a shorter cage would offer better tension and smoother shifting if the chain stayed the same length. Is it based on lever mechanics? Tension on the end of the longer cage is less due to the mechanical advantage?


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Bartj said:


> ...why a shorter cage would offer better tension and smoother shifting if the chain stayed the same length. Is it based on lever mechanics? Tension on the end of the longer cage is less due to the mechanical advantage?


Right! Think of the cage as a lever arm. As you know, a longer lever is easier to displace against a fixed counter force.

In this case, the fixed force is the tension spring, which is same spring regardless of which cage length it is installed on.

The bouncing chain is attempting to operate the lever arm (derailleur cage) and displace the spring. Longer cage = easier to move. Shorter cage = more difficult.


----------



## Juanmoretime (Jul 30, 2004)

I would assume that if I'm reading correctly that a 11-32 with a 22-32-44 front would work great although I might have to watch the lower cogs in the back when in the 22?

Thanks!


----------



## Ausable (Jan 7, 2006)

Speedub.Nate said:


> Oops! Accidentally shifted into the unusable "red zone"? Nothing major: the derailleur cage folds back on itself, the chain droops, and you maybe drop the chain if you don't catch it in time.
> 
> In my opinion, it'd be stupid to size a chain any smaller than what is required to shift into big-big. If you accidentally force a shift into that combo, which is certainly possible when you're tired or "in the moment", you don't want to break anything. *So chain length will be the same no matter what derailleur you choose.*


I see that the debate "long cage vs medium cage" is centered on the risk of destroying the derailleur if the chain is crossed in the big ring/big cog combo. 
In my opinion this is not correct. 
If the chain lenght is right, the only gear combos to avoid are the small ring/small cog - and the result of a wrong combination would be slack chain, and not a stripped derailleur. 
So the medium cage can be used without any risk even with a typical 22-32-44 crankset and 11-34 cassette, *assuming that the chain lenght is correct.*
What is your opinion on this?


----------



## Ausable (Jan 7, 2006)

Juanmoretime said:


> I would assume that if I'm reading correctly that a 11-32 with a 22-32-44 front would work great although I might have to watch the lower cogs in the back when in the 22?
> 
> Thanks!


According to my post above, this is correct. 
Hope that other opinions will follow.

fab


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Ausable said:


> I see that the debate "long cage vs medium cage" is centered on the risk of destroying the derailleur if the chain is crossed in the big ring/big cog combo.
> In my opinion this is not correct.


You are correct. My opinion is the "chain will be too short/drivetrain will break" argument is missing the obvious.

I always suggest sizing the chain according to the "big-big" method prescribed by both Shimano and SRAM, no matter what cage length is chosen.


----------



## bigsurf75 (Mar 16, 2007)

I'm still not completely understanding this and I've read this thread twice in the past two days.

I busted my derailleur and hanger tonight after a pretty nasty spill on asphalt; the turn was pretty sharp, I was goin pretty fast, and I missed a wet spot... So, now I'm in need of a new derailleur for my GT hardtail. I've got a new FS frame on the way as well, and this new rear derailleur I would like to be compatible with my new frame.

Everything on the GT 1.0 is still stock since when I ordered it almost 10 months ago. So I'm assuming it has standard cogs up front, and standard rings in the back. The only thing I cannot confirm is whether or not the chain has been sized correctly. From that picture that Nate posted, it looks to me as if they left no room at all for a derailleur in the big-big combination... correct?

I'd like to get the smallest derailleur possible, while still retaining the ability to use the majority of my gears. I like the crisper shifting, and reduced chain slap benefits of the smaller cage. However, I need someone to help me pick one out. 

Also, are chains usually sized correctly right from the factory?


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

bigsurf75 said:


> From that picture that Nate posted, it looks to me as if they left no room at all for a derailleur in the big-big combination... correct?
> 
> I'd like to get the smallest derailleur possible, while still retaining the ability to use the majority of my gears. I like the crisper shifting, and reduced chain slap benefits of the smaller cage. However, I need someone to help me pick one out.
> 
> Also, are chains usually sized correctly right from the factory?


Correct... well, sort of. When you do the "big-big+2" and actually shift the bike into the big-big combo, the derailleur cage should be sticking pretty well forward. That's the intention.

My impression is that stock chains are often a few links long, but not always. Also take into account chainstay growth when the suspension cycles.

With stock 27-speed gearing, you can definitely get away with a snappy shifting medium cage. Just know your limitations: shifting to maybe 1/2 of your small-small gears will result in no chain tension, and likely a dropped chain.


----------



## bigsurf75 (Mar 16, 2007)

I wonder if I could shorten the chain enough to make a 1/4 of the small-small combos unusable, and a 1/4 of the big-big combos unusable. 

I think I would probably find myself using these combos less frequently.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

bigsurf75 said:


> I wonder if I could shorten the chain enough to make ... a 1/4 of the big-big combos unusable.


Yes, absolutely. But is is prudent? Maybe 99.9% of the time you'll catch yourself. But all it takes is that one epic ride, topping that forever long climb, transitioning into a saliva-inducing descent (maybe a little short of O2 to the brain), when you mis-shift and rip your rear derailleur into your spokes, or bend the big chainring, or fold over your cassette.

So yeah, it'll work, but it's a personal call with risks to consider. I'd never recommend it.


----------



## bigsurf75 (Mar 16, 2007)

Hmm, Maybe I will just go with a long cage. 

However, at the same time I was looking at BR's in a few other threads and I may make the switch to a 2x9 with a 24-36 up front. I'm gonna try riding around for a day or two ( I think I can nurse two days out of the busted deraileur) without using the big ring and see if I miss it. If that's the case, I'm goin to a med. cage rear.


----------



## Sealama (Jun 4, 2007)

Speedub.Nate.......Thanks for your explanation!!! Great job!!!

I'm using 44-32-22 crankset & 11-34 cassette, and deciding to buy a new sram X.0 med cage RD. But I still have a question about how to determine the proper chain length.

Somebody told me that when I shift the chain on the largest chainring on the front and the smallest cog on the rear, if the the top pulley is sitting directly above the lower pulley, the chain is the proper length. So, can I apply this theory if I'm using a med cage RD?

Thanks!!!


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Sealama said:


> ...I still have a question about how to determine the proper chain length.


Stick with the Big-Big +2 technique I posted the graphic of a few posts up (post #33). That's the best way to ensure you have just enough chain to shift to Big-Big without breaking anything.


----------



## cocoasprinkles (Apr 12, 2007)

The new stumpy is equipped with a Med cage and it's standard up front and 11-34 out back.


----------



## MikeDee (Nov 17, 2004)

HTail said:


> I'm finding my SRAM XO med cage works great with 11-34 cog. In fact it can accommodate the extreme large-large gear combo, but as we all know, it's not recommended with full-susp bikes (chain growth upon compression). The shifts are definitely snappy, quick and precise- partly due to the shorter cage, and mostly to SRAM's shift system.


It's a myth that a shorter cage shifts better. The shift is made when the ramps line up with the chain on the cassette. If your chain hangs slack in some gear combinations, you're more prone to skipping or chain suck in those gear combinations.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

MikeDee said:


> It's a myth that a shorter cage shifts better. The shift is made when the ramps line up with the chain on the cassette. If your chain hangs slack in some gear combinations, you're more prone to skipping or chain suck in those gear combinations.


Is your "myth" assessment coming from analyzation or from use out on the trail? I suspect the former. Cage length does make a noticable difference in shifting and performance.

Sure, shift ramps help some with a shift, but they're not necessary. The shift occurs when the idler pulley on the derailleur (that's the upper wheel) changes alignment with the cassette cog.

But behind that is maybe sixteen inches of chain, stretching from the lower tensioner pulley (that's the lower one) to the chainrings.The further away that chain is from the anchor point / pivot points of the derailleur, the more difficult it is to move precisely. Think of a fat piece of nigiri at the end of a L-O-N-G set of chopsticks.

As for your "chain slack" assessment, it's not as if the derailleur cage is magically decreasing in tension in certain useable gear combinations. Either is doesn't have tension in certain unusable small-small combos (as previously discussed), or it's got FULL tension (and, more importantly, higher tension than a longer cage -- simple physics there).

If my some Shimano voodoo longer cages shifted better and held better tension, that's all they would offer, and roadies would be riding with derailleur cages hanging scant millimeters off the ground.


----------



## akashra (Dec 30, 2006)

I have a X.9 Med cage sitting here on my desk along with a set of X.9 shifters (series prize), and am thinking about putting them on the new Anthem (which has a Shadow on it). However given I have tons of 11-34 spares and only a Deore 11-32 sitting around, for now I might have to leave the XT on there - since numerous people have pointed out the problems of putting a Med cage with an 11-34 cassette on a duallie.


----------



## downhillross13 (Jun 21, 2006)

i need help. im running a x0 short cage with a 11-23 cassette and a 38T front chainring. should i be running a short cage or long cage??


----------



## Chris130 (Mar 28, 2005)

downhillross13 said:


> i need help. im running a x0 short cage with a 11-23 cassette and a 38T front chainring. should i be running a short cage or long cage??


Do you mean 11-32 cassette? Either way, you are fine with a short. Run the numbers for yourself - Nate laid it all out for you on the first page using caveman-easy math.

Cheers, Chris


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

Trentkc said:


> I have a new SRAM X9 long cage derailleur, and another X9 that I now realize is "not long". Both are brand new, but the short one is ~16mm shorter.
> 
> What is the proper application for long versus short cage derailleur? Will the short one work with a 11/34 cassette? Does it matter if the bike has a rear suspension or is a hardtail?
> 
> Is my shorter X9 a "short" cage or "medium" cage? Thanks //kct


General rule

1 ring - short cage
2 rings - medium cage
3 rings - long cage

Since us MTBers typically use the largest range cassette possible, I think this is a pretty good rule.


----------



## downhillross13 (Jun 21, 2006)

naw im running a dura-ace 11-23 cassette. yea i did the math and ended up with 50T. i dont know what the range is per dif. type of cage


----------



## Chris130 (Mar 28, 2005)

downhillross13 said:


> naw im running a dura-ace 11-23 cassette. yea i did the math and ended up with 50T. i dont know what the range is per dif. type of cage


Gotcha. With only a single ring up front, the first part of Nate's equation is 0 (whatever ring size minus itself), so all you have to account for is the 'big cog minus small cog' teeth spread. That's basically what's behind the "single ring -> short cage" rule-of-thumb.

Cheers, Chris


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

willtsmith_nwi said:


> General rule
> 
> 3 rings - long cage


Generally the "safe" recommendation, especially if you don't want to go through the lengthy explanation and/or math. I enjoy the benefits of the medium cage on my 3x9, however.

Rules of thumb are great, but it's good to know what's at the foundation of the rule, too.


----------



## noobee_1_kenobi (Dec 27, 2007)

*xtr vs xo*



Speedub.Nate said:


> Right! Think of the cage as a lever arm. As you know, a longer lever is easier to displace against a fixed counter force.
> 
> In this case, the fixed force is the tension spring, which is same spring regardless of which cage length it is installed on.
> 
> The bouncing chain is attempting to operate the lever arm (derailleur cage) and displace the spring. Longer cage = easier to move. Shorter cage = more difficult.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Echoing the others: Thanks so much! Your posts have been quite educating.

Now my question would be (for Speedub.Nate , or for anyone who would know): For an apple-to-apple comparison, which one (which brand) has the higher/stronger tension spring (ie. xtr med vs xo med)? Has anyone done any actual measurments to compare?
Thanks in advance!

Cheers!


----------



## pedalitup (May 30, 2007)

Its pretty obvious that the Shimano short (GS) cage length is tailor made for the Ultegra 12-27 cassette and 22-32-44 triple combo. . .

I've been running said combo since early '05 and have not missed the 44-11 gear at all. I ride a road bike and learned to spin decades ago. I really find little need to go much faster than that on a hardtail anyway. Runs nice and quiet and affords much tighter ratios for fine tuning on fireroad time trial sections. I use the phat low mount style XT front D so I can confidently bail to a lower chainring and have NEVER dropped the chain with that long pivot masterpiece. 

And. . .since my pushed/shoved Xtc weighs less than 21 lbs I never need any lower than the 22-27 granny either. I find myself making up lots of time climbing 1mph faster too. 

Hey thanks for the clarification and chart that shows me I'm locked outa the 11-32 as I had suspected, but never really tried.


----------



## Freerydejunky (Sep 21, 2006)

Sorry to bring this back from the dead. 
But I need a new derailleur pretty bad. Im looking at either a short cage x9 or med cage. 

As of now Im running a single 32 up front with the possibility of going to a 34 for the summer. With a road cassette 12-23 in the back. 

What would you run and why?


----------



## Chris130 (Mar 28, 2005)

motormonkeyr6 said:


> Sorry to bring this back from the dead.
> But I need a new derailleur pretty bad. Im looking at either a short cage x9 or med cage.
> 
> As of now Im running a single 32 up front with the possibility of going to a 34 for the summer. With a road cassette 12-23 in the back.
> ...


Short. Why would even consider (given the choice) using a medium with that setup? 

Cheers, Chris


----------



## Freerydejunky (Sep 21, 2006)

Chris130 said:


> Short. Why would even consider (given the choice) using a medium with that setup?
> 
> Cheers, Chris


My bike see's alot of abuse, its all Freeride and DH so maybe with a longer derailleur the load would be lessend on the derailleur itself.

Would a short accommodate a 12-27 cassette?


----------



## jcaino (May 26, 2007)

motormonkeyr6 said:


> My bike see's alot of abuse, its all Freeride and DH so maybe with a longer derailleur the load would be lessend on the derailleur itself.
> 
> Would a short accommodate a 12-27 cassette?


the cassette is a moot issue more or less, when running a single ring, you want the shortest cage possible.

i run a 36T ring up front with a 11-26 road cassette. you'll be fine.

i also have a spare wheelset with a 11-34 cassette - the short cage works fine here too.


----------



## Freerydejunky (Sep 21, 2006)

jcaino said:


> the cassette is a moot issue more or less, when running a single ring, you want the shortest cage possible.
> 
> i run a 36T ring up front with a 11-26 road cassette. you'll be fine.
> 
> i also have a spare wheelset with a 11-34 cassette - the short cage works fine here too.


Thanks for clearing that up guys!


----------



## 1singletrack (Apr 4, 2008)

*Still needing help*



Ok...I've read and re-read but still am finding this a bit confusing. First with my setup. I ride a full suspension with 11-32 and 22-44. I will be replacing my current Shimano XT rear derailleur (long cage) and would like to know if I would benefit using a medium cage (2008 Shimano XT). If I size the chain to Big-Big+2 how do I take into account for the rear suspension? Also, after sizing the chain, would I be able to use ALL the gear combinations with no problems or would I have to make sure not to use certain combos? I don't want to have to worry about shifting into the wrong gear so should I just stick with a long cage?

Any help would be really appreciated.


----------



## jcaino (May 26, 2007)

1singletrack said:


> Ok...I've read and re-read but still am finding this a bit confusing. First with my setup. I ride a full suspension with 11-32 and 22-44. I will be replacing my current Shimano XT rear derailleur (long cage) and would like to know if I would benefit using a medium cage (2008 Shimano XT). If I size the chain to Big-Big+2 how do I take into account for the rear suspension? Also, after sizing the chain, would I be able to use ALL the gear combinations with no problems or would I have to make sure not to use certain combos? I don't want to have to worry about shifting into the wrong gear so should I just stick with a long cage?
> 
> Any help would be really appreciated.


if you're sticking with the 3x9, then you're probably going to want to retain the long cage...you can go with a medium cage, but you'd have to be mindfull of your shifting, ie: no big-big combo (44 up front, 32 in the rear) which you shouldnt't be doing anyway as that is major cross-chaining.


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

1singletrack said:


> I ride a full suspension with 11-32 and 22-44. I will be replacing my current Shimano XT rear derailleur (long cage) and would like to know if I would benefit using a medium cage (2008 Shimano XT). If I size the chain to Big-Big+2 how do I take into account for the rear suspension? Also, after sizing the chain, would I be able to use ALL the gear combinations with no problems or would I have to make sure not to use certain combos? I don't want to have to worry about shifting into the wrong gear so should I just stick with a long cage?


The total capacity you need is 44-22+32-11, or 43. Shimano recommends 33 or thereabouts for their medium cage, so you're definitely a candidate for the long cage. If you use the medium cage, the derailleur will be unable to take up all the slack chain for certain gear combinations and you'll have a drooping chain.

When you're sizing your chain, move the suspension through it's range of travel (taking out your shock or deflating it can help with this), and see what the max chain length required is. Use the big-big+2 rule at that max length to size the chain.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

jcaino said:


> if you're sticking with the 3x9, then you're probably going to want to retain the long cage...you can go with a medium cage, but you'd have to be mindfull of your shifting, ie: no big-big combo (44 up front, 32 in the rear) which you shouldnt't be doing anyway as that is major cross-chaining.


No... no small-small combos. Always size your chain to accept a shift into big-big, unless you're willing to deal with the consequences.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

1singletrack said:


> Ok...I've read and re-read but still am finding this a bit confusing.... I don't want to have to worry about shifting into the wrong gear so should I just stick with a long cage?


In your case, with your statement, yes, stick with long cage. That will cover you in all possible gears without having to "worry about shifting."

Once you're willing to avoid cross chaining to small-small, a medium cage would likely work fine on your setup.

As for measuring chainstay growth, get a piece of dental floss and tie it on your crank's spindle. Zip tie the loose end to your rear quick-release -- so it's taut, but still slides when you tug on it. Now cycle your suspension, then go back to the dental floss. It should be hanging a little loose, unless your bike is a URT or BB-concentric pivot. Pull the floss taut again through the zip tie. For each 1/2" of floss you pull through the zip tie, you'll need to add an inch (2 links) of chain to account for chainstay growth.


----------



## 1singletrack (Apr 4, 2008)

Speedub.Nate said:


> Once you're willing to avoid cross chaining to small-small, a medium cage would likely work fine on your setup.


Speedub.Nate...so if I do decide to go with the medium cage, the only gear combination I would need to avoid is the small-small one with my 11-32+22-44? If that's it then perhaps I'll go with a medium in order to have crisper, more precise shifting. Also, thanks for the tip on sizing the chain with a FS bike.

Thanks so much guys for getting back to me so quickly...this forum is absolutely amazing.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

1singletrack said:


> Speedub.Nate...so if I do decide to go with the medium cage, the only gear combination I would need to avoid is the small-small one with my 11-32+22-44? If that's it then perhaps I'll go with a medium in order to have crisper, more precise shifting. Also, thanks for the tip on sizing the chain with a FS bike.


Take a look again at that color table I put together in the first post. All the gear combinations in green are ok to use. The ones in yellow and red -- the smaller half of your cassette range when you're in your smallest chainring -- are going to be the ones you'll want to avoid using.

The grey ones are "big-big," and though you'll size you chain accordingly so that shifting to these combos won't damage anything, these cross-chain combos are best avoided, no matter what cage length you choose (due to chain stress & drivetrain wear).


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

It would probably be more than just the small-small combo, a few more combinations up I would imagine. If you accidentally shift into one of the no-no combos you won't damage anything, but you could drop your chain. Honestly I would just go with the long cage, it was made for the triple ring.


----------



## doctorholguin (May 9, 2007)

guys...i know i might be kicking a dead horse all over again, but i need some guidance...ok, i raced for the first time, and i decided to become a weight wenie....thus far, i came up with some weight reductions...my bike dropped about 3 lbs...so i have been looking at the possibility to throw a short cage derailleur and go 2x9...please either explain a bit more to me about the pros and cons of doing this or guide me to the right forum or thread...i will really appreciate it...


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

doctorholguin said:


> ...so i have been looking at the possibility to throw a short cage derailleur and go 2x9...please either explain a bit more to me about the pros and cons of doing this or guide me to the right forum or thread...


With a 2x9 setup you may be able to use a short cage der, and almost certainly a medium cage.

Take the difference in teeth of your max and min cogs, and the difference between the chainrings, and add them up. For example, if you want to run an 11-34 in the back and 22-32 in front, the difference is 23 in back, and 10 in front. For a total of 33. Your chosen derailleur should have a max capacity of at least that much.

In the same example, if your derailleur has a capacity of less than 33, it's still no big deal. Size your chain to accept the big/big combo, and just remember to never shift into small/small, because the derailleur may be unable to take up all the chain slack, and your chain will droop. Conversely, you can size your chain a few links short, so that it's okay in the small/small combo, but then you should never shift into big/big because it may damage your derailleur.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

doctorholguin said:


> ...so i have been looking at the possibility to throw a short cage derailleur and go 2x9...please either explain a bit more to me about the pros and cons of doing this or guide me to the right forum or thread..


Lyndonchen hit all the points you need to consider, but here's where 2x9 is different:

With 3x9, you're always going to have a bunch of cross-over gears and "illegal" cross-chain combinations. It's those illegal gears that allow a medium (GS) cage to be used on a triple-ring setup.

With 2x9, you're eliminating a bunch of cross-over gears, but you're not necessarily eliminating cross-chain combinations that should be avoided. It depends on where you set your chainline. In theory, the entire 2x9 range could be useable.

But you may want to set it up with where one ring or the other (your primary chainring) is centered on the cassette, for optimized use of the full range of gears, or you may want to bump your outer ring out for better chain alignment in your hammer gears. All depends.

So basically: Make a gearing matrix like the one in my original post. Decide what gears you want to use, and highlight those that you consider unnecessary (if any).

For certain, medium cage will work with any full-range 2x9 setup. Based on your needs, a short cage _may_ work if you're planning to eliminate some gear combinations.


----------



## sheppardk (Nov 23, 2006)

*Chain suck potential?*

Anyone want to comment more on chain suck potential when one has a choice between Long vs Med cage? My hypothesis is that with a long gage the "lever" is longer thus keeping more tension on the chain in the granny gear(22/34 in my case). My experience is the opposite I have on bike with XTR med cage and never get chain suck. I have another with long cage X0 and get chain suck in dirty conditions. Both are typical 22-32-44 , 11-34.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

sheppardk said:


> My hypothesis is that with a long gage the "lever" is longer thus keeping more tension on the chain in the granny gear(22/34 in my case).


It's exactly the opposite. Switch it up, and think of the derailleur cage as the lever arm that allows the bouncing chain to act against the tensioner spring.

The chain has more authority over the tensioner spring when connected by longer cage lengths; less with shorter.

That's the reason for the quieter drivetrain when shorter cage lengths are used.


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

*Med cage good*

I've been running a medium XO for a year now and finding it works fine, even when accidentally in extreme cassette/chainrg combos. I've also noticed I haven't gotten chain suck since switching to the med cage derailleur.

In general just very happy with SRAM XO versus my previous Shimano XTR.


----------



## svenpup (Apr 15, 2008)

lyndonchen said:


> The total capacity you need is 44-22+32-11, or 43. Shimano recommends 33 or thereabouts for their medium cage, so you're definitely a candidate for the long cage. If you use the medium cage, the derailleur will be unable to take up all the slack chain for certain gear combinations and you'll have a drooping chain.
> 
> When you're sizing your chain, move the suspension through it's range of travel (taking out your shock or deflating it can help with this), and see what the max chain length required is. Use the big-big+2 rule at that max length to size the chain.


lyndonchen, you are treating the chain sizing issue separate from the cage sizing issue for full suspension. If you have to add chain (beyond the standard big-big +2) to account for chain stay growth, the dérailleur has to take up that extra chain when the suspension is in it's "short chain" position.

Based on everything I have read in this thread, it seems like the process should be:


Determine chain length using Big-Big + 2 + (2 links for each 1/2 inch of chain stay growth)
Determine cage size accounting for extra links for chain stay growth, where:
cap req'd (T) = (BIG ring - small ring) + (BIG cog - small cog) + (extra links)


----------



## sheppardk (Nov 23, 2006)

This is a a great thread - Thanks speedub.nate. 

I agree that med cage seems like a much better choice in most situations. Last week I got a med cage X0 and replaced a long cage X9 and there is much more chain tension with low gears. It is also quieter and I have had no chain suck so far. On my normal ride I ride through a small creek. If I had not cleaned my chain for more then a couple of rides then I would get chain suck going uphill after the creek. I have ridden 5 times(about 7 hours) without cleaning my chain and have had not chain suck with the med cage X0. The proof will come when I ride in the mud, but so far so good. It is hard to understand why one would choose a long cage for most cases.


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

After installing the med cage a couple yrs ago, I thought I'd have to baby it on the trails, but just the opposite, it actually feels more robust. I really think the long cage is overkill, unless they go to 10 speeds someday. 

I also think that those of us that ride regularly also use a narrower range of gears, for instance, rarely use the granny + I'm not doing a lot of technical stuff day to day. Maybe long cage is better for those that need the wider range either because of the trails or personal heft!


----------



## dropadrop (Sep 20, 2005)

The sticky pointing to this thread says there is no short cage X9, only X0. I thought I have a short X9, and one is mentioned in this thread... I'm confused! I know have 1x9 and need to switch to 2x9, trying to decide if I also order a new rear deraileur...


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

dropadrop said:


> The sticky pointing to this thread says there is no short cage X9, only X0. I thought I have a short X9, and one is mentioned in this thread... I'm confused! I know have 1x9 and need to switch to 2x9, trying to decide if I also order a new rear deraileur...


Where's the confusion?

A quick Google search shows lots of short cage X.9s available, and lists a chain capacity of 32T.

Note the date of the original post. Product lines change. The calculation remains the same -- all you need to know is your derailleur's chain capacity.


----------



## marcel-titus (Dec 28, 2006)

*short cage rear derailleur*

interesting thread!

question:
what is the biggest cog a XTR RD-M950 short cage can catch (yep, pretty old rear derailleur  )? 
Can this take up to 28 tooth in the rear? Or is it recommended to use this one with a road cog set, lets say 12-26?

thanks!


----------



## dropadrop (Sep 20, 2005)

Speedub.Nate said:


> Where's the confusion?
> 
> A quick Google search shows lots of short cage X.9s available, and lists a chain capacity of 32T.
> 
> Note the date of the original post. Product lines change. The calculation remains the same -- all you need to know is your derailleur's chain capacity.


Thanks. I should have looked at the date, I just thought the sticky had all the essential information from this thread combined and updated and did not think about googling.


----------



## bch1985 (May 20, 2008)

> Rather than use the generic formula, let's map out the capacity for each gear combination (based off of a Shimano cog pattern; SRAM will be slightly different):


THanks, Awesome!!! Now I finally know why when I am in my 1-9(short-short) gear while biking it sounds like it is an unstable gear and like it doesn't want to be there. Which makes me shift either to 1-8 or up to 2-5. Great Post.


----------



## gregoryb02 (Nov 4, 2006)

Nate -

I didn't do very well in math class... If I have a 11/34 cassette and only run two rings up front (small & medium w/ bash guard, no big ring) , should I use a SRAM short or medium cage and what length chain? Thanks a ton!

(P.s. You have my vote for the 2008 Nobel peace prize ! http://nobelprize.org/ )


----------



## jcaino (May 26, 2007)

gregoryb02 said:


> Nate -
> 
> I didn't do very well in math class... If I have a 11/34 cassette and only run two rings up front (small & medium w/ bash guard, no big ring) , should I use a SRAM short or medium cage and what length chain? Thanks a ton!
> 
> (P.s. You have my vote for the 2008 Nobel peace prize ! http://nobelprize.org/ )


you can use a short cage, providing you dont cross-chain, and use the big-big combo, which shouldnt be done anyway.

a medium would also work wonderfully.


----------



## Ericmopar (Aug 23, 2003)

jcaino said:


> you can use a short cage, providing you dont cross-chain, and use the big-big combo, which shouldnt be done anyway.
> 
> a medium would also work wonderfully.


A medium cage is the safe bet and a necessity if the bike has a high forward single pivot (think Santa Cruz Bullit). 
Thats with two rings, no bigger than about 38 on the big ring.

I just found all this out, the hard way tonight. 
I bought a med cage dérailleur for my single pivot by mistake.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Great Read! Thanks alot guys, especially Nate!

I just ordered my SLX 662-GS (Med Cage). for my 2x9 and probably eventually 1x9 setup.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

ZenkiS14 said:


> Great Read! Thanks alot guys, especially Nate!


Hey, no problem, you're welcome. The ironic thing is that I haven't used derailleurs since about 2002, with a couple of exceptions.


----------



## chexem (Jan 22, 2007)

:nono: :nono: :nono:


----------



## chexem (Jan 22, 2007)

*Yeah But...*

When asked about a 1x9 setup and der size requirements:



Speedub.Nate said:


> That's an easy one... go as short as you can possibly go.
> 
> See, it's not the *size* of the front chainring that factors in, but the *range* between the biggest ring and the smallest ring.
> 
> ...


I have a Ultegra short cage der on its way for my new 1x9 hardtail. The spec on the Shimano website states: 
*Maximum Sprocket 27T *
Minimum Sprocket 11T 
Maximum Front Difference 16T 
Total Capacity 29T

I get the "Total Capacity" limitation from the above, most excellent explanation, however I am concerned that the *"Maximum Sprocket"* may make my 11-34 unusable in the lower two gears on the cassette.

So, whaa???


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

chexem said:


> I have a Ultegra short cage der on its way for my new 1x9 hardtail. The spec on the Shimano website states:
> 
> *Maximum Sprocket 27T *
> 
> &#8230;I am concerned that the *"Maximum Sprocket"* may make my 11-34 unusable in the lower two gears on the cassette.


Yeah, there's a "rise" and a "reach" component: the reach is the easy part, but the rise (will the derailleur clear the cog?) is the question. And that's independant of cage length, since the body of the derailleur seems to remain constant with any particular model.

What I can tell you is I ran a short cage road derailleur on a 1x9 setup on a folding bike recently (before converting it over to a gear hub). The cassette was a mountain range 11-32T. The derailleur was either Ultegra or Dura Ace, can't remember.

I had to snip a portion of the cage off, the part that loops around the guide pulley. But it was due to a clearance issue with the frame. The pulley cleared the cassette with no trouble.


----------



## RebaRox246 (Nov 21, 2007)

I'm just checking to see if all of my drivetrain will be compatible when I set it up: 11-32 Sram Cassete, Sram x7 rear derailleur short cage, sram x7 front derailleur low mount, truvativ stylo 22-32-44, and sram pc 991 cross step.
thanks


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

RebaRox246 said:


> 11-32 Sram Cassete, Sram x7 rear derailleur short cage, sram x7 front derailleur low mount, truvativ stylo 22-32-44


Your rear derailleur needs to have a chain capacity of 43 or more. (44-22)+(32-11) = 43. I don't know what the capacity of the short cage is but it's likely not enough.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

RebaRox246 said:


> I'm just checking to see if all of my drivetrain will be compatible when I set it up:


I'd go nothing shorter than a medium cage if you're ok with the limitations outlined in the original post.


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

*Med cage good*

I agree med. cage is the best all around. You can still push the large/small gear limits (though not recommended) and still get more taught chain tension and spiffy shifting.


----------



## mrwibble (Aug 23, 2007)

I want to change the 11-34 on my cannondale bad boy to a road 11-23 or 12-26, should I go for a X9 medium cage at the back instead of the long cage I have now?
Thanks all


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

You can use a med cage on 11-34, with marginal performance at the extremes. Definitely if your gearing higher, go for a med cage to keep the chain taught.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

mrwibble said:


> I want to change the 11-34 on my cannondale bad boy to a road 11-23 or 12-26, should I go for a X9 medium cage at the back instead of the long cage I have now?
> Thanks all


Depending on your ring setup (if you're running doubles), you could go short cage.


----------



## emptybe_er (Jan 15, 2006)

Speedub.Nate spent the night at a Holiday Inn  

Short cages tend to pack quicker during wet conditions - there's not enough room between the pulleys.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

emptybe_er said:


> Speedub.Nate spent the night at a Holiday Inn


I totally agree! I used to be the night auditor. Spent the night? I had the run of the damn joint! Night after night after night after.... zzzzzz....

Uh, what'da ya say?!?

The only thing better than short cage is no cage!


----------



## mrwibble (Aug 23, 2007)

Forgot to say guys, chainring is 48-36-26 again with long cage X-9


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

mrwibble said:


> chainring is 48-36-26


Then medium cage, for sure.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

*Go Short (SS) Cage*

An SS cage will have no problem with a 12-26 and 48-36-26 gearing.


----------



## RebaRox246 (Nov 21, 2007)

sorry i meant medium cage, i don't think they make a X7 short cage


----------



## geogecko (Sep 22, 2005)

Since this seems somewhat related, is the same method of determining chain length for a hardtail the same for a softtail, i.e., chain around big chainring/big cog, no derailleur jockey wheels, with one full chainlink (2 straight sections, 3 pivot sections) of overlap? I'm trying to size a chain for a FS bike, which is my first. I've always followed that rule for my hardtail with good results. I guess I assume the distance gets shorter under compression of the rear suspension...


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

geogecko said:


> Since this seems somewhat related, is the same method of determining chain length for a hardtail the same for a softtail... I guess I assume the distance gets shorter under compression of the rear suspension...


The method is the same. Your assumption is wrong however; a lot of suspension designs lengthen the chain when compressed. The proper way to size the chain would be to let all the air out of the shock (if it's air-sprung) or better yet, remove the shock from the frame, and cycle the suspension through its travel. Find where the chain growth is greatest and size the chain at that point in the travel (with the 2-link rule).


----------



## geogecko (Sep 22, 2005)

Ahh, you were right. I see a two link increase in chain length needed for my setup.

I do have a problem. I sized the chain for the 2 link overlap, then the 2 extra links for the full suspension "growth," then installed a PowerLink, which adds one more link. So total, I have 5 links of overlap, and in the small chainring, next to smallest cog, I have sag in the chain when it is run through the derailleur. So, I'll have even more when I go to the smallest cog.

Problem is, I can't just remove one link, and still use the PowerLink, I would have to remove two links.

The setup is a 44/32/22 crank, with an 11-34 in the back. I'm using a Shimano XTR SGS derailleur.

Should I just remove two links?


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

geogecko said:


> Should I just remove two links?


You'll probably be okay removing 2 links. You'd only be 1 link short of what Shimano recommends. You'd have to be in big/big, and then sink deeply into travel, before you (might) have a problem.


----------



## geogecko (Sep 22, 2005)

Thanks, that worked perfectly. After doing that, I cycle the suspension, and it still seems to be about right...I doubt I'll find myself in big/big anyway.


----------



## lucatosolini (Dec 2, 2006)

very usefull thread..
i run an xt crank with 27 instead of 22 and 42 in the middle and 12 34 cassette
now i have an xtr 960 rear der long cage and i'm going to change it with an xtr shadow..
should i run a gs version?
i know that the shadow has a longer cage than older xtr..


----------



## geogecko (Sep 22, 2005)

Almost everything I've seen in the forums here has suggested to get the XT shadow rear derailleur, instead of the XTR shadow. The XTR almost doubles in price, and the only difference is the carbon cage, and 2 out of the 2 jockey wheels have bearings, instead of 1 bearing and 1 bushing. Of course, this comes from someone that has the XTR version, and the second ride already got scratches all over the carbon cage, and I didn't even realize I had hit it on anything... Just an observation, didn't really help you with your question.


----------



## nig202 (Jan 26, 2009)

*short cage*

HEllo

Firstly thanks to Speedub your information was great but i still have a little bit of doubt as to what im doing.

I recently bought a Shimano LX M580 GS raqpid rise on the internet. I admit i think i may have made a mistake with the length of the cage but i thought the super long cage was going to be too long therefore touch the rocks andstuff that i passed.

When it arrived it seems very short alot shorter than i ever expected. 
I am running a 44-32-22 fromt cogs and a 11-34 rear cassette. I understand the system with the gear combinations but will this cage be ok for the set up that i have. will it still perform the same job or should i pay the extra and return it for the longer cage.

Second Question can i dismount the cage and fit the old cage as its still fine and straight.

Thanks to all in advance look forward to a response.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

nig202 said:


> I recently bought a Shimano LX M580 GS raqpid rise on the internet.
> 
> I am running a 44-32-22 fromt cogs and a 11-34 rear cassette...should i pay the extra and return it for the longer cage.
> 
> Second Question can i dismount the cage and fit the old cage as its still fine and straight.


The GS cage will work for your gear combination, but will it work for you? If you're willing to observe the limits I wrote about in the original post in this thread, then mount it and run it. If you feel as though you're going to be forgetful or lax and will frequently shift to the small small combo, expect a lot of dropped chains.

I don't know the answer to your second question. If they're both the same model, the you ought to be able to swap cages with very little hassle.


----------



## fastmxer99 (Feb 10, 2009)

wow awesome thread... even a few years later. I just changed my order from a long cage to short. glad I found this =)


----------



## sacredny (Aug 10, 2007)

Good thread just went to a 32-22 bash set up and replaced my X9 long cage with a short one


----------



## mrback (Sep 25, 2004)

*heckler small 08 setup, is this poss?*

ok can this be done? I have a sram x9 short cage rear mech, 11-34 cassette & 22t,34t,bash setup. when the gears are set to big big there is not enough chain length as the rear shocks travel only goes to about half way & is really tight. I havent rode this like this yet, my local bike shop set this up for me but I dont think they checked to see if the rear suspension was fully compressed when they checked the chain length. So is it a matter of just putting a longer chain on or do I need to change the cassette?


----------



## Haggis (Jan 21, 2004)

mrback said:


> ok can this be done? I have a sram x9 short cage rear mech, 11-34 cassette & 22t,34t,bash setup. when the gears are set to big big there is not enough chain length as the rear shocks travel only goes to about half way & is really tight. I havent rode this like this yet, my local bike shop set this up for me but I dont think they checked to see if the rear suspension was fully compressed when they checked the chain length. So is it a matter of just putting a longer chain on or do I need to change the cassette?


Measure & add chain as discussed. Aside from the chain length problem, your setup is beyond the short cage capacity, according to Nate's table..


----------



## ruib99 (Apr 2, 2008)

thanks nate and to you all. :thumbsup:


----------



## ReductiMat (Jun 3, 2008)

First off, thanks a ton for this thread Nate. Very informative.

I'd like to go to a 32/22 with an 11/32 cogset short cage. You've mentioned wiggle room in the sizing... I'm right on the cusp I believe.

Will I be able to get away with this setup on a SRAM X0 Short Cage (30T I believe)?

Thanks again


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

ReductiMat said:


> First off, thanks a ton for this thread Nate. Very informative.
> 
> I'd like to go to a 32/22 with an 11/32 cogset short cage. You've mentioned wiggle room in the sizing... I'm right on the cusp I believe.
> 
> ...


Asumming the cages are the same size, I have a short cage X-9 with an 11-34 cassette and 22/32 up front and I can even hit the 22:11 combo (no that I ever do).


----------



## ReductiMat (Jun 3, 2008)

kapusta said:


> Asumming the cages are the same size, I have a short cage X-9 with an 11-34 cassette and 22/32 up front and I can even hit the 22:11 combo (no that I ever do).


Excellent, thanks!

Did you size your chain along the lines of "Big to Big + 2 links"?


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

ReductiMat said:


> Excellent, thanks!
> 
> Did you size your chain along the lines of "Big to Big + 2 links"?


Yes. (Big-Big being 32:34)


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

wow great thread. (even if it is a bit old, it still applies) 
getting ready to convert my 3x9 to a 2x9 and was wondering if I could get rid of some chain slap by shortening the chain and getting a Med cage.. thanks for the advice!!!

slightly off topic.. if I shorten the chain, get a Med Cage, replace 44 ring with a bash guard, should I reset/ move my Bottom Bracket and/or crank outward to re-center it on the rear cassette?

and.... 
does someone make something like a 24 tooth inner ring for the Stylos crank? the 22 is just a bit to granny even for me. I know all about the math of having all the gears/ratios and you can get just about any combo.. but shifting down the front and up the rear all at once is just a pain.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

thomllama said:


> wow great thread. (even if it is a bit old, it still applies)
> getting ready to convert my 3x9 to a 2x9 and was wondering if I could get rid of some chain slap by shortening the chain and getting a Med cage.. thanks for the advice!!!
> 
> slightly off topic.. if I shorten the chain, get a Med Cage, replace 44 ring with a bash guard, should I reset/ move my Bottom Bracket and/or crank outward to re-center it on the rear cassette?
> ...


Yes, shorten the chain. The same rule applies for chain length (big/big + 2) only now your "middle" ring is the big ring. This is the biggest thing you can do in regards to chain slap.

Yes, you can get away with a med cage, I would go with a short even if it means losing the small/small combo which you really should not be using anyway. A med or short cage will help a little bit in terms of slap, but not nearly as much as the shorter chain. In any event, you can still use your current der and see how it goes.

As far as the chainline, I would leave it where it is. It is already set up so that the middle ring is good for the whole cassette. The way I use it, the granny is only used for the 3 biggest cogs and is only used in the most steep/long climbs. Some rides I don't ever use it. Therefore, it is important to me that the middle is in the optimum position (besides, only using the biggest three cogs in granny means that I don't want to move it farther out, either)

There are countless 24t granny ring options available for your crank. You may also want to consider going with a bigger "middle ring". 24/36 is a pretty popular 2 ring combo.


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

kapusta said:


> Yes, shorten the chain. The same rule applies for chain length (big/big + 2) only now your "middle" ring is the big ring. This is the biggest thing you can do in regards to chain slap.


*that's what I thought.*



kapusta said:


> Yes, you can get away with a med cage, I would go with a short even if it means losing the small/small combo which you really should not be using anyway. A med or short cage will help a little bit in terms of slap, but not nearly as much as the shorter chain. In any event, you can still use your current der and see how it goes.


*well on my 26" tire bike your right, but on the 29er I use the granny (22t) a lot more because I find myself about 2 gears up the rear cassette with the bigger tires over what I use on the 26er, Seems while riding the average trail around here I run just the top 1/3rd of the rear when using the middle ring. Or I shift the front a LOT which is a pain and wears the chain a lot more than is normal.*



kapusta said:


> As far as the chainline, I would leave it where it is. It is already set up so that the middle ring is good for the whole cassette. The way I use it, the granny is only used for the 3 biggest cogs and is only used in the most steep/long climbs. Some rides I don't ever use it. Therefore, it is important to me that the middle is in the optimum position (besides, only using the biggest three cogs in granny means that I don't want to move it farther out, either)


*again, with the 29er I end up using the granny up front and running the chain up and down the full rack in the back... I really only use the middle ring on long flats, more just because of easy of shifting than anything else. reason I was asking about a 24 granny, almost thinking of going 1x9 with a 24 or 26 up front if thats possible. But if I keep the 2x9 I'm almost thinking of moving the chainline out more than normal. something like where the granny front is centered on the upper 2/3's of the rear and the Mid (now large) ring is centered on the smaller 1/3rd of the rear.... that make since?*



kapusta said:


> There are countless 24t granny ring options available for your crank. You may also want to consider going with a bigger "middle ring". 24/36 is a pretty popular 2 ring combo.


*Cool, thanks.. any where someone recommends price and/or service wise?*


----------



## Nickbee (Jul 15, 2009)

OK.. I'm bringing up a dead post... but this has been one of the only posts that I've read every word of. 

I'm going to do a build thins winter of an '06 Epic frame. While I'm much better now about not crossing my chain I do not want to give up my ultra granny 22 front, 34 rear combo. 

For people using 22 / 32 / 44 front and 11-34 in the rear with an x0 med cage on a full suspension bike.... how's it working???? 

Thanks for any real world feedback you can provide!!!!!


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Nickbee said:


> OK.. I'm bringing up a dead post... but this has been one of the only posts that I've read every word of.
> 
> I'm going to do a build thins winter of an '06 Epic frame. While I'm much better now about not crossing my chain I do not want to give up my ultra granny 22 front, 34 rear combo.
> 
> ...


22 front, 34 back is not cross chaining, and you will not lose that combo no matter what cage you run.


----------



## Nickbee (Jul 15, 2009)

kapusta said:


> 22 front, 34 back is not cross chaining, and you will not lose that combo no matter what cage you run.


ya I know that... the reason I mentioned it was to say why I want to stick with an 11-34 rear cass...

thanks!


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

I've had no problems with a medium cage. it's get's a little grindy when you push the limits of the chain ring and cog, but not something you should do anyways. I'm sold on med cages just for better chain tension- have not had chain suck since I've gone medium.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 3, 2008)

sorry, its been a long day and i'm confused

what sram x.9 deraileur length do i need for a 11-34 t cassette, with 22, 32, 44 t rings?
and for a 11-32 t casette?

cheers guys


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> sorry, its been a long day and i'm confused
> 
> what sram x.9 deraileur length do i need for a 11-34 t cassette, with 22, 32, 44 t rings?
> and for a 11-32 t casette?
> ...


Medium or long.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 3, 2008)

kapusta said:


> Medium or long.


would one work better than the other?
and would all gears be available with medium?


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> would one work better than the other?
> and would all gears be available with medium?


Come on man, this question got answered in the second post of this thread and then re-answered many times.


----------



## cup (Sep 22, 2007)

just need a double confirmation, 
i just followed the formula, presuming i'm running 2 chain ring up front, xt cranks (32-22) and a sram pg990 (11-32)
so if i follow the formula, i should get:
(32-22)+(32-11)=31T
in any case i'm hoping to get the saint rear dee, heres the mambo jambo

Maximum Sprocket : 28/34T 
Minimum Sprocket : 11T 
Front Difference : 14T 
Total Capacity : 31/37T 

i see 31T in total capacity, so i presume, i'm on the right track? thanks guys!


----------



## cup (Sep 22, 2007)

cup said:


> just need a double confirmation,
> i just followed the formula, presuming i'm running 2 chain ring up front, xt cranks (32-22) and a sram pg990 (11-32)
> so if i follow the formula, i should get:
> (32-22)+(32-11)=31T
> ...


anybody can help me? thanks in advance


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

*What's your question*

Sorry, what are you trying to determine? Whether to use a short, med, or long cage with the 2 chainring setup?


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

joehspicer, you need a derailleur with a capacity of (44-22)+(34-11)=45. Switching to a 11/32 cassette changes the necessary capacity to 43. Both setups point to a long cage rd; a medium cage would leave some ratios unuseable.

cup, your math looks right. I see your Saint specs are coming from the longer cage version, don't know what the "31/37" means, but whatever the case, it'll handle your setup.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

cup said:


> anybody can help me? thanks in advance


Yes, you calculated correctly. 31t capacity to guaranty use of all combos.


----------



## herbn (Sep 17, 2005)

i use the wimpy 20 tooth granny,so i get some slack ,and my chain could probabely be shorter.I do tend to stick in my big ring for as long as possible,usually somewhat unintentionally.i still feel that the big ring is more efficient, even crossshifted a bit,on the roadbike and even moreso on a suspension bike. Even these days with stable platform shocks and virtual pivots,if you've got rolling terrain and can stay in the big ring and just shift up the cluster it seems faster.


----------



## cup (Sep 22, 2007)

cup said:


> just need a double confirmation,
> i just followed the formula, presuming i'm running 2 chain ring up front, xt cranks (32-22) and a sram pg990 (11-32)
> so if i follow the formula, i should get:
> (32-22)+(32-11)=31T
> ...


oh snap, i quote the wrong info. saint short cage tech spec

Maximum Sprocket : 28/34T 
Minimum Sprocket : 11T 
Front Difference : single front chainring 
Total Capacity : 17/23T

it seems that i cant run the short rear dee right mates?


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

cup said:


> oh snap, i quote the wrong info. saint short cage tech spec
> 
> Maximum Sprocket : 28/34T
> Minimum Sprocket : 11T
> ...


Not with a double chainring setup.


----------



## herbn (Sep 17, 2005)

I think a short cage deraileur shifts better because the chain is tighter. I'd be willing to bet that the actual spring that tensions the cage is the same in both versions(l+s) in the long cage it has a longer range due to the cage but the actual tension on the chain is lower. A tighter chain hits the ramps or the next set of teeth(on the next gear)more solidly and gets picked up quicker.


----------



## cifex (Sep 11, 2009)

Anyone know if I'd be able to go short cage (X-9) with a single 32T ring up front and 11-34T? Would I be able to use all the gears? (this is 1x9 setup).


----------



## herbn (Sep 17, 2005)

even a short cage is ment to run a small range triple (24,32,42)and at least small cassette (12-32) on a suspension frame with a little "chain grow" so i would say almost certainly, in fact a road deraileur should work,a typical roadbike has a 12 tooth range on the cluster and 14 tooth range on the cranks for a total of 26 ,with just an 11-34 cluster you have a 23 tooth range. Alot of DHers have used road deraileurs,even with a lot of travel.


----------



## Seraph415 (Apr 7, 2004)

Speedub.Nate said:


> You've got a medium cage. Sram makes a short cage mountain derailleur in the X.0 line, but only goes as low as a medium in the X.9.


Incorrect, Sram makes a short cage model for X.7, X.9, and X.0.

In my experience, here is the general rule: short cage is for a single ring in the front (32-42t), medium cage is for a double (22-24/32-36), and long cage is for a triple (22-24/32-36/42-44). Every derailleur in the Sram 9-speed lineup is rated for use on a cassette with up to a 34t large cog.

Shimano only manufactures long (SGS) and medium (GS) cage derailleurs for most of their mountain shifting systems (SLX, XT, XTR, etc), with the exception being Saint M800 and M810, for which they have a short (SS) cage option as well as the standard medium cage, but no long cage (M810 only). The only exception to this was back in the XTR M950 series when a short cage derailleur was manufactured for a brief period of time.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Seraph415 said:


> Incorrect, Sram makes a short cage model for X.7, X.9, and X.0.


Did you notice the date on his post?


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

kapusta said:


> Did you notice the date on his post?


Holy crap... this thread is over three years old already?

Perhaps I should ask the Mods permission to edit it due to changes in what's available and (I would guess) stated derailleur capacities.

Ah, the math remains unchanged. Carry on...


----------



## az1jeff (Feb 5, 2007)

*1x9 . .*

What about this scenario: 1(29) x 9(11-38). Even though this gives a 27t result and is within SRAM's max (30t) for short cage, I wonder if a short cage would get the chain to the bigger 38t rear cog?

jeff


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

az1jeff said:


> What about this scenario: 1(29) x 9(11-38). Even though this gives a 27t result and is within SRAM's max (30t) for short cage, I wonder if a short cage would get the chain to the bigger 38t rear cog?
> 
> jeff


Short vs long cage has nothing to do with the max cog size.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

az1jeff said:


> What about this scenario: 1(29) x 9(11-38). Even though this gives a 27t result and is within SRAM's max (30t) for short cage, I wonder if a short cage would get the chain to the bigger 38t rear cog?
> 
> jeff


Yeah, what kapusta said... plus, somewhere SRAM lists a max cog size for their derailleurs. I'm not up to speed on this 38T gear, or any compatibility problems it might present.


----------



## az1jeff (Feb 5, 2007)

kapusta said:


> Short vs long cage has nothing to do with the max cog size.


 That's interesting. Especially since both manufactures spec a maximum rear cog size on their rear derailleurs. What searching I did says longer cages allow larger rear cogs. One reason listed for giving max cog size is what the largest cog the derailleur can handle without ramming into the cog, and that the derailleur may have trouble lifting the chain onto the cog. But what do I know, that is why I asked. . Thanks anyways.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

az1jeff said:


> That's interesting. Especially since both manufactures spec a maximum rear cog size on their rear derailleurs. What searching I did says longer cages allow larger rear cogs. One reason listed for giving max cog size is what the largest cog the derailleur can handle without ramming into the cog, and that the derailleur may have trouble lifting the chain onto the cog. But what do I know, that is why I asked. . Thanks anyways.


Exactly, go by the max cog size they list. The length of the cage is a separate issue. If you look at all the Sram RD's the max cog size are all the same across the different cage lengths (34t).

http://www.sram.com/_media/pdf/sram/manufacturers/NewTechSpecifications_RoadMTB_MY08_RevA.pdf

See page 23.

Whether they in fact can be used for something larger is another question. I have used a road RD for a max cog larger than it was rated for. However, the max cog size is unrelated to the length of the cage.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Zactly. Another example is an Ultegra (road) short cage rear derailleur, which has a max cog size of 27 but worked just fine on a 32 or 34T cassette after I Dremeled off a small part of the cage that was rubbing the largest cog.

Cage length generally just takes into account how much chain slack can be taken up; max cog size relates to the distance / geometry between the pivot and the guide pulley.


----------



## az1jeff (Feb 5, 2007)

Thanks. :thumbsup: I'm going to give a short cage with a 38t cog a try. .

jeff


----------



## DFYFZX (Jun 19, 2009)

Has anyone run a short cage der. with one of the new 36T cassettes? My 34T shifts fine with the X0 short cage but I need a new cassette and was thinking of going to the 36T but have doubts about it working smoothly:skep: Mathematically, the ratio will work BUT, the cage is only so long and I'm sure it has a mechanical limit. Opinions???


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

DFYFZX said:


> Has anyone run a short cage der. with one of the new 36T cassettes?... have doubts about it working smoothly ...the cage is only so long and I'm sure it has a mechanical limit.


The mechanical limit would exist between the jockey (upper) pulley and the main parallelogram pivot. Assuming the body is the same and only the cages are different as necessary, I would expect it to work.

You may be able to find published capacities, but typically Sram hasn't measured up to Shimano's standard.


----------



## mike007 (Apr 29, 2009)

This is so useful. Thank you.

I want to do short cage for my full suspension, 2x9, 22/32 front and 11-34 back.

But I don't get the dental floss thing for the full suspension, is the spindle where the bb is? So I zip tie that to the rear wheel qr?

Can I just let all the air out of the shocks, and do big big plus 2 links?

Thanks all.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

mike007 said:


> ...I don't get the dental floss thing for the full suspension...


The dental floss thing is just to see how much your chainstay length increases when your suspension cycles. It's not really necessary, but can satisfy a curious mind.

Chainstay length is measured from the spindle (yeah, that's what your crank spins on) to your axle. So tie it off to the spindle, then friction fit it to the QR with the zip tie so that it stays put, but pulls through the zip tie when tugged.

Start by pulling it tight (bike at no sag because you're not sitting on it). Then cycle your suspension, and the floss will pull through the zip tie as the chainstay length increases.

When you're done, with the bike back at zero sag, pull the floss back through to make it tight again. The amount of loose floss you pull through represents how much your CS length grew. For every 1/2 inch you pull through, add in two links above and beyond the +2 you're already adding in using the Big Big +2 method.

Wanna go a step further? Figure out how much your chainstay length SHRINKS when you cycle the suspension (don't ask -- I don't have any ideas how to go about measuring this). Shrinkage requires you to subtract from the derailleur's stated capacity, because at its shortest is where the potential for chain sag is maximum.


----------



## Hangingchads (Jun 30, 2009)

Speedub.Nate, I got a question... not figuring the math cause I got an extra component and I am brain dead on this so far. I am running a X7 med cage in the rear with a 11-34t in the rear and 22-32-bash. I want to step the mid ring to a 34 to make it 22-34 then run a short cage in the rear. I have a Blackspire chain tension/guide. Would I have any issues with this setup. 

Thanks!


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Hangingchads said:


> Speedub.Nate, I got a question... not figuring the math cause I got an extra component and I am brain dead on this so far. I am running a X7 med cage in the rear with a 11-34t in the rear and 22-32-bash. I want to step the mid ring to a 34 to make it 22-34 then run a short cage in the rear. I have a Blackspire chain tension/guide. Would I have any issues with this setup.
> 
> Thanks!


34-11=23
34-22=12

Total capacity req'd = 23+12 = 35T

Unlike a triple, you're allowed more latitude to cross chain a double, depending on your preferences and chainline. If you want the use of the full range of your cassette from both chainrings, you'll need the full 35T capacity. If you're planning to only run the 22T with the lower half of the cassette, you can go with less.


----------



## alexzabr (Feb 19, 2010)

Great thread offering lots of useful info allowing to understand what is behind just a plain short answer what cage to use for what kind of setup.

Just few days back I bought SRAM X.9 rear mech and not being aimed with proper knowledge picked medium cage (also, store owner approved it suitability for 27-speeds bike, not even asking me what king of cog/chainrings setup do I have and whether it is fully suspended ot hardtail...).
Now, according to the excellent explanation by Speedub.Nate, I calculated and realized that for any practical case, even havn 44-22 chainrings and 32-22 cog on hardtail I still can enjoy the benefit of medium cage which would probably preclude me from using only last three combos such as 22 on front with 3 smallest cogs on rear (anyway not very practical)...
Am I correct ?


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

alexzabr said:


> Great thread offering lots of useful info allowing to understand what is behind just a plain short answer what cage to use for what kind of setup.
> 
> Just few days back I bought SRAM X.9 rear mech and not being aimed with proper knowledge picked medium cage (also, store owner approved it suitability for 27-speeds bike, not even asking me what king of cog/chainrings setup do I have and whether it is fully suspended ot hardtail...).
> Now, according to the excellent explanation by Speedub.Nate, I calculated and realized that for any practical case, even havn 44-22 chainrings and *32-22* cog on hardtail I still can enjoy the benefit of medium cage which would probably preclude me from using only last three combos such as 22 on front with 3 smallest cogs on rear (anyway not very practical)...
> Am I correct ?


I assume you meant 11-32 rear cassette?

Yeah, if you are willing to give up the smallest cog or two with the small ring (useless combo(s), anyway), the Med will work. Personally, I would use a med in your situation, given the choice. The capacity estimates seem to be conservative, so you may loose fewer gears than you think.


----------



## vpd7 (Apr 20, 2007)

I recently tried a medium cage on a 44/32/22 x 34-11 setup. I could use every gear with these exceptions;

When the chain was shortened for the best compromise in the 22 x11 and 22 x 13 combinations the derailleur was all the way back and the chain would rub on itself because it was doubled back.

When I went to the 44 x 34 combination the derailleur would jamb when trying to upshift to 44 x 30. If I stayed out of the 44 x 34 it would work, and if I shifted down from the big ring first it would not jamb up. I know I would not be able to remember to stay out of this combination forever so for me it would be a bad idea.

In all I would call a medium cage on this set-up marginal for several of combinations....but possible. Other people may be able to get more out of it.

I only tried for the sake of science. I went to a 36/22 x 34-11 setup and for that it seems to work well.


----------



## alexzabr (Feb 19, 2010)

yes, kapusta, I obviously meant 32-11 rear cogs, sorry.
I'm quite new to mountain biking, but like to learn theory behind the stuff, so now learning bike's mechanics and preparing to my first mechanical job on my bike - swapping my current drive setup of Shimano LX rear derailleur along with both Deore shifters for new X.9 and X.O twisters. Hence learning theory first...
Also, form my limited biking experience including climbings, I noticed never to use 22-11 or similar combinations. When I deliverately tried to use such - it felt really awkward.
I mainly do medium at front with any cogs at rear 22 with larger 2-3 cogs or rear 44 with smaller 2-3 cogs.
It appears medium cage will indeed do fine for me..


----------



## dropadrop (Sep 20, 2005)

Tried looking through a few pages but did not find an answer...

I'm wondering if my XTR Shadow has a GS or SGS cage. I measured it's just under 13cm long (~5"), anyone know which one it is?


----------



## vpd7 (Apr 20, 2007)

I believe that is an SGS. I have a RD-M953 and that is an SGS and has a similar dimension. The SG is quite a bit shorter. I can measure that tonight if you need it.


----------



## dropadrop (Sep 20, 2005)

I would appreciate it if it's not too much trouble, thanks.


----------



## vpd7 (Apr 20, 2007)

The RD-953SGS is 3-3/8 axle to axle and the RD-M970SG is 2-1/2 axle to axle.


----------



## the_Alaskan (Nov 4, 2009)

So I've seen posts from others that ask about using a short cage with a 11-34/ 22-32 setup. and the general consensus is that a medium would be best, BUT that a short would work. would there be any benefits to using a short over a medium? and would these benefits outweigh the risks?


----------



## levar012586 (Dec 2, 2009)

*medium vs short :madman:*

I was told today that I can make my bike less sluggish by using a road cassette (11-26). I have a 32 and 22 front. My question is can I use a medium RD or would that not be recommended? I'm trying to purchase the X.9 RD from JensonUSA but the large and medium RD's are like $50 cheaper than the short.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

levar012586 said:


> I was told today that I can make my bike less sluggish by using a road cassette (11-26).:


I am curious to know the rational behind that.


----------



## levar012586 (Dec 2, 2009)

I'm no expert on it or anything, but I'm thinking it's because all your gears are small and make you move as opposed to the 32 and 34 which barely move the bike.:idea:


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

levar012586 said:


> I'm no expert on it or anything, but I'm thinking it's because all your gears are small and make you move as opposed to the 32 and 34 which barely move the bike.:idea:


You have small cogs on an 11-34 cassette as well.


----------



## levar012586 (Dec 2, 2009)

I know but when you have more options in a small range (11-26 region), maybe its easier to find that right gear that makes it feel easy to pedal but you're still haulin'. I don't know. I have a 2x8 drivetrain on my bike and it just seems like I'm riding a FR or DH bike! When I ride round town I feel like I'm fighting the bike. If you have any other options to make my bike faster I'm all ears.

I forgot to mention I live in south Florida where it's incredibly flat so i hardly ever touch the 34.


----------



## Ricci Chang (Jun 9, 2008)

Thanks! Speedub Nate.
Every time I and my bike friends had trouble determine which deraillur to use, we pull out this tread to look for your info (dated back July 2006) as reference.
Yap. Almost 4 years since and I still can't remember that formula.
That says a lot just how good you are!


----------



## ZexX_pt (May 2, 2010)

Hi Guys!

I'm moving to a 2x9 setup in my new bike. I'm going to use 42T on the middle and 26T on the granny and a 11-32T cassette. By the maths it would be (42-26)+(32-11)=16+21=37
From the first post I can see that the limit of the XTR GS is 33T but that in real life it is more like 39T. Do you think I need the larger SGS model?

Thanks!


----------



## Ricci Chang (Jun 9, 2008)

ZexX: Wait!!!
42T won't fit on the middle!
Most MTB frames can fit 38T on the middle; very few can fit 40T on the middle without robbing the chain stay. That why few manufacturer makes 40T in 104BCD.

If you are lucky to fit 40t on the middle ring, 28t for the granny is better choice than 26t. Short cage deraillure should work but I will use mid cage to be safe, as it allows you to use 26t granny or 11~34t cassette if you wish afterward.


----------



## ZexX_pt (May 2, 2010)

Thanks Ricci Chang,

I'm aware that if I want to use a 42T in the middle I will probably have to add a 2,5mm spacer and will have to compensate on the left side somehow. I really want a 42T or a 40T because it suits my style better and since I have read that there are people that can do it, I will try to.
but my concern is that if a medium cage is enough with my combination.
Thanks.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

ZexX_pt said:


> Hi Guys!
> 
> I'm moving to a 2x9 setup in my new bike. I'm going to use 42T on the middle and 26T on the granny and a 11-32T cassette. By the maths it would be (42-26)+(32-11)=16+21=37
> From the first post I can see that the limit of the XTR GS is 33T but that in real life it is more like 39T. Do you think I need the larger SGS model?
> ...


You can get away with the shorter cage length because your granny's alignment to the cassette isn't changing, so you'll still want to limit yourself to using the inside half of the cassette when churning the granny ring. If you don't -- i.e. run granny to small cog -- you'll be cross-chaining just the same as you would on a traditional 3x9 setup.

With a 2x9 you might consider which gear combos are most useful to you because you could alternatively bump out the chainline so the outer ring is centered on the smallest cogs, which will reduce wear and increase efficiency when hammering, or centering the gap between the rings on the cassette, providing you with the widest range of usable gear combos.


----------



## ZexX_pt (May 2, 2010)

Thank you Speedub.Nate!

In my 3x9 setup, I normally use the middle 32T with the lower cogs on the cassette. When I need more speed I jump to the outer plate, and when I need to go slower on some occasions I use the bigger cogs with the middle ring. 
That's why I'm going to use a 2x9 setup with 42T in the middle ring because it will allow me to normally use it with the middle cogs, giving a very good alignment and I will mostly change gears on the cassette. I will only use the 26T granny in some occasions where the 42T(plate)-32T(cassette) isn't good enough.
My concern was if the medium XTR GS cage would prove enough or if I would need to use the SGS but it looks like the GS is a go! 

I know it is a little off topic but if the 42T in the middle rubs in the chain stays (I cannot verify it yet because I'm waiting for the rings to arrive as well as a new frame) what do you advise? In other topics most people use an extra spacer of 2,5mm on the bb but that causes the left arm to be 2,5mm more inward that the right arm. They then change the alignment of the clips on the shoes to correct it. Do you think is ok to do it?


----------



## MikeDee (Nov 17, 2004)

Speedub.Nate said:


> Is your "myth" assessment coming from analyzation or from use out on the trail? I suspect the former. Cage length does make a noticable difference in shifting and performance.


No it doesn't. I've tried short and long cage Shimano derailleurs, and didn't notice any difference in shifting quality, just a PITA in trying to avoid certain gear combinations.


----------



## Ricci Chang (Jun 9, 2008)

ZexX:
Master Speedhub always gives the best answer in this tread, so I will not re-address.

I still don't understand why people want to mass-up the chain/crankset alignment and/or spacer adjuestment issue. I suggest to use 40T (instead of 42T) in the middle if you can, without having the 40T middle ring rubbing the chain stay. This way you will not have to worry about spacing or alignment.
Afterall, 40T front with 11t rear has the same gear ratio as a 44T front (typical) with 12t rear. You don't miss much (speed) anyways. (only 1 gear.)

I use 38T on my commuter/XC bike and 36T on my trail bike, both 1x9 setup suit me perfectly!


----------



## alexzabr (Feb 19, 2010)

Now the question of derailleur size estimation for FS bike..
I'm building myself (based on Titus FTM frame), how trying to assess the proper choice of the derailleur case...I intend to go for SRAM X.9
I understand the calculations for hardtail and use medium cage of X.9 for 44/32/22 with 11-32.
However now I understand it is necessary to take into account chain growth under full compression (hence chain length will be longer). Does that mean that the cage should likely to be longer then in the same combination for hardtail ?
So that should I consider long cage with FS for the same setup ?

Thanks


----------



## french_yeti (Aug 17, 2005)

Hi All,

On my yeti 575, I went and follow the rule for a 44/32/22 with 11-34 set up, and chose a medium cage x0.

I knew about the limitations with small cog and small at the rear and I am fine with this.

The question I have is that I am using a KMC SL9 chain, with quick link. I wanted to apply the big - big + 2 links rule, but as the quick link provided has to be fit between 2 small links, my choice was reduced to either a +1 or a +3. I chose +1 as +3 was taking more gears off.

The result seems fine, although the medium cog + big 34T at the back pulls the derailleur towards the front.

Is that risky in that case shown below:










Thanks


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Make that picture smaller!


----------



## french_yeti (Aug 17, 2005)

kapusta said:


> Make that picture smaller!


Sorry about this, it is done.

Thanks

Y.


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

french_yeti, as pictured that's no problem, the derailleur can handle that easily. I would compress the suspension and make sure chain growth won't be a issue.


----------



## El Maguey (Jul 14, 2010)

*Short vs. Long, cont...*

Time for a new rear drllr and I'm too dumb to do the math. I run an 8 speed Standard Drive (not compact drive) 24-36-46 front and a 12-32 rear on a full suspension 4 inch travel XC bike. Long cage or medium cage? Thanks to all.


----------



## chtorres2 (May 29, 2010)

*What would work better for SRAM XX Kit*

Ok so I just ordered a complete Sram XX kit. The crank is a 26t/39t and the cassette is a 11-36. If I did the math correctly its giving me 38T which falls right next to the 37T for medium derrailieur. Does this mean I should not get a long cage (which I already did but I have not mounted yet)? Is there a performance loss using the long cage vs a performance gain in the medium cage other then a couple of grams? Does this formula apply to the XX kit due to the different spring tension being stiffer in the derrailieur. Please be specific and thanks in advance for all the help. I didnt know the differences in cage sizes till just now.:thumbsup:


----------



## 2fst4u (Dec 2, 2006)

*sram xo cage broke*

Guys, heres a new question I couldn't find an answer to. I need to replace my sram 09 XO RD cage (broken).

Will the medium cage kit which is just the cage and the pulleys be compatible with the derrailer body even if the old cage is a long one? In other words can I swap a medium cage onto the derr body even if the previous cage was a long? I'm assuming they can if the derrailer body is the same, but not sure. The kit is like $100 expensive!!

Also, can someone tell me how to make sure I have a medium cage or long.


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

I've been using a med cage SRAM XO,with a 3x9 drive train for years now. Works great, shifts better than a long cage in my opinion?


----------



## Initial_D (Sep 15, 2010)

*SRAM X9 2x10 speed (42-28 & 12-36)*



chtorres2 said:


> Ok so I just ordered a complete Sram XX kit. The crank is a 26t/39t and the cassette is a 11-36. If I did the math correctly its giving me 38T which falls right next to the 37T for medium derrailieur. Does this mean I should not get a long cage (which I already did but I have not mounted yet)? Is there a performance loss using the long cage vs a performance gain in the medium cage other then a couple of grams? Does this formula apply to the XX kit due to the different spring tension being stiffer in the derrailieur. Please be specific and thanks in advance for all the help. I didnt know the differences in cage sizes till just now.:thumbsup:


Same situation as me. I'm ordered new SRAM X9 (2x10 speed) as below spec;
- Crank : 42-28
- Cassette : 12-36
The TDC for this spec is 38T which is over the spec of medium cage only 1T!
So, I should go with medium or long cage?

Moreover, I've planned to change from hardtail to full-suspension (xc) around end of this year. Can I use medium cage with my new frame?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## colinago (Jun 27, 2005)

*question about 11-36 w/ 44-29 front*

Hey there, I have a question that seems like no one knows but I am thinking someone will know on here. I have a 29er HT with a fsa 44-29 front chainrings. my question is can I use a 11-36 9sp with a xo med cage der. or long cage der. Or am I screwed or should I consider other cassette options. I can handle 44-32 2 x 9 w 11-34 on my 26er so what do I use on the 29er HT. I am new to the 29er technology. Thanks? And will any xo med or long der work or do I have to get a 2010 xo 9sp model?.


----------



## colinago (Jun 27, 2005)

*re: Long vs Med cage*

I am repeating myself I know, so I have a new 29er with a 44-29 frnt 2x9 setup. What cassette can I get away with and with what size and year xo der? can I run a 11-36 9sp with a med cage? Or do I go to the long cage? Does it matter what year xo rear der I get? I have heard only 2010's can except a 36t ? I have seen the equation on this post looks like I am on the needle with a med? Help Please! Or do I go to 11-34 11-32 with a 29er and a 44-29 frt chainring set up? Thanks


----------



## Remmo (May 13, 2010)

Hi,

Thanks for the great info; another question on this subject: I run a 1x9 setup; 32 in front with a 11-34 cassette; can I use a SRAM 'super short' derailleur??


----------



## dypeterc (Nov 26, 2006)

*2x9*

i'm researching about running 2x9 using a 9-speed Shimano XT M770 34-11T or 32-11T cassette and 39/26T SRAM X0 2.2 crank with an '09 X0 *short-cage* derailleur. below are the capacities of the two cassettes. it looks that only three gears will be unavailable in both cases, which is acceptable for me. i plan on running in the 39T for the majority of time. what do you think?

also, should i run a 9-speed chain or 10-speed chain for this drivetrain?


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

dypeterc said:


> i'm researching about running 2x9 using a 9-speed Shimano XT M770 34-11T or 32-11T cassette and 39/26T SRAM X0 2.2 crank with an '09 X0 *short-cage* derailleur. below are the capacities of the two cassettes. it looks that only three gears will be unavailable in both cases, which is acceptable for me. i plan on running in the 39T for the majority of time. what do you think?
> 
> also, should i run a 9-speed chain or 10-speed chain for this drivetrain?


Why do you want to use a short cage? A medium or long will give you less headaches with no worries in a 2 x 9. Hopefully, weight loss is not your main motive as the X.0 9 speed RD's weigh 203/197/192g.

You can use either a 9 or a 10 speed chain. You can get away with using one size smaller chain - so a 10 will work on a 9. The internal measurements of the chains are similar. It's the external width that is a bit narrower on the 10 speed. Again, is this a weight loss issue?

BB


----------



## dypeterc (Nov 26, 2006)

BruceBrown said:


> Why do you want to use a short cage? A medium or long will give you less headaches with no worries in a 2 x 9. Hopefully, weight loss is not your main motive as the X.0 9 speed RD's weigh 203/197/192g.
> 
> You can use either a 9 or a 10 speed chain. You can get away with using one size smaller chain - so a 10 will work on a 9. The internal measurements of the chains are similar. It's the external width that is a bit narrower on the 10 speed. Again, is this a weight loss issue?
> 
> BB


not a weight issue. i had the short cage from a previous drivetrain. it'll also provide quicker shifts. i'll be sticking with the large ring the majority of the time. i'm fine with missing only 3 ratios in the small ring. i've also read that to use a 10-speed chain when using the new SRAM doubles even though the cassette is 9-speed.


----------



## T76 (Nov 11, 2009)

Anybody have more real world results with medium cages? I believe I am buying a medium cage. Thanks for all the replies.


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

T76 said:


> Anybody have more real world results with medium cages? I believe I am buying a medium cage. Thanks for all the replies.


I've been running a mid cage with 2x9 for over a yr now. The mid cage shifts faster but a long cage shifts "smoother" if that makes sense 

shorter cages will shift faster, but do to the lower ability to flex both chain length and actual cage flex the faster shifting results in kinda a clunky, stiffer feel when shifting to larger rings. Basically the chain wont work it's way up but has to snap up...

going to a short cage I would imagine would have the same effect but more so..?


----------



## T76 (Nov 11, 2009)

thomllama said:


> I've been running a mid cage with 2x9 for over a yr now. The mid cage shifts faster but a long cage shifts "smoother" if that makes sense
> 
> shorter cages will shift faster, but do to the lower ability to flex both chain length and actual cage flex the faster shifting results in kinda a clunky, stiffer feel when shifting to larger rings. Basically the chain wont work it's way up but has to snap up...
> 
> going to a short cage I would imagine would have the same effect but more so..?


So I am ordering one today. It sounds like I will like it better. I just want it to be where it is supposed to be in what gear and get there quickly. Sounds like Medium to me. :thumbsup:


----------



## Fogerson (Oct 16, 2007)

*1x9, 36T CR + 11/34T Cassette: Short or super-short?*

Hi folks,

I'm running my Jet9 as a 1x9 w/36T chain ring and 11/34T 9sp cassette.

'Currently have a medium cage x.9 and want to go with at least a short x.9 derailleur.

I can't seem to find the capacity of a X.9 super-short derailleur though. I'm guessing that is easily within the 23T I need, but 'am a little concerned with the fact I'm running a 36T on the front.

Anybody know if a super-short will do the job or should I play it "safe" and go with a short?

Thanks in advance.
Tim


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Fogerson said:


> Hi folks,
> 
> I'm running my Jet9 as a 1x9 w/36T chain ring and 11/34T 9sp cassette.
> 
> ...


The size of the ring on a single ring setup is completely irrelevant. 22t, 32t, 44t, 54t, whatever, it is all the same, there is no capacity to take up. You just look at the spread of the rear cassette.


----------



## drewgold (Oct 23, 2010)

Can someone please tell me what the physical lengths are of the cages are for 10 speed Sram X0 derailleurs? Specifically the Medium and/or long cages measured center of pulley to center of pulley. Thanks!


----------



## alexzabr (Feb 19, 2010)

yet once again to beat a dead horse...
I'm going to build my second bike which is going to serve my AM ambitions.
Intend to put SLX dual ring crank + bashguard + chain guide and 11-34 cassette.
The crank rings will be either 22/36 or 22/34 (right now I see SLX is offered in 22/36 combination, I think I'd rather prefer 22/34 but so far couldn't figure such).
The calculated capacity to cover entire range for these should be 37 or 35 (depending on crank rings setup), the desired derailleur is SRAM X.9.
I notice X.9 today is also offered by SRAM in small (not only medium or large as it was previously), so that I'd like to consider going for small cage. Apparently the declared capacity of small is 30 which is 5-7 less then I need to cover entire range.
Having said that, my current rig has standard 3-chainrings SLX + 11-32 cogs and I run X.9 medium cage successfully (even though its declared capacity of 37 is 8 short of my actual setup). I used to shift carefully avoiding any cross-shifting and that proves to work flawlessly for me.
Now, I have never tried 2 chainrings setup yet, but it appears to me in such cases both rings get about equivalent usage with all the cogs and in such case I'd probably better to have the derailleur cage full coverage (which suggests for medium cage in my case).
Am I wrong ?
Do you think short cage of X.9 would still work fine for that setup or I'd rather opt for medium ?
I ride XC on aggressive side, perhaps more into AM, the new bike will mostly be for AM.
So far I notice I use larger chainring very seldom (usually for commuting by roads to my regular riding locations), then stay on middle (32) for about 50% of the time while utilizing the grainy for most of the singles (which are quite aggressive). So in total the 44 chainring gets used perhaps less then 5% of my riding time.

Will be happy to hear your opinions.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

alexzabr said:


> yet once again to beat a dead horse...
> I'm going to build my second bike which is going to serve my AM ambitions.
> Intend to put SLX dual ring crank + bashguard + chain guide and 11-34 cassette.
> The crank rings will be either 22/36 or 22/34 (right now I see SLX is offered in 22/36 combination, I think I'd rather prefer 22/34 but so far couldn't figure such).
> ...


On my 2x9 setup (22/32/bash, 11-34) I am in the "middle" ring about 95% of the time. My granny is only for the grinder climbs, once I am beyond 3rd gear in the back I'm back to the middle ring.

I use a short cage x-9 with no problems. I can fully cross-chain in the small ring if I wanted to, but never have any need to go anywhere near it. I could care less if I lost the capacity to use the smallest three cogs in my small ring.

So, for you it is basically a question of whether you care about losing some of the small-small combos.


----------



## alexzabr (Feb 19, 2010)

Thanks.
I also can hardly imagine the situation when I'd stay on grainy while willing to shift to the small cogs, I usually synchronizing the small cogs with the appropriate ring (which will be the "middle" in dual setup).
However, there are time when one can be caught up being on "middle" while quickly shifting to the large cogs (for instance, when fast down trace rapidly switches to steep uphill and the rider is willing to do minimum operations to stay focused on the trail - just shifting the rear).
So the question is whether in dual setup if large-large cross can be handled (at least just occasionally) by short cage...


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

alexzabr said:


> So the question is whether in dual setup if large-large cross can be handled (at least just occasionally) by short cage...


As long as you make the chain the right length, big/big combo can be handled by any size cage on any setup. It is the small/small combos you lose. I use the big/big combo (actually middle/big, since the big position has a bash) all the time.


----------



## alexzabr (Feb 19, 2010)

Aha, thanks a lot, sounds reassuring.
I wasn't sure what side of the equation comes into play and exceeding rated capacity of the derailleur - over-tension (big/big) or taking the slack (under-tension).
Now I see it is all about the ability to take up the slack of the chain maintaining usable tension at all.

It appears I'll go for the short cage indeed...


----------



## Boerg (Nov 1, 2008)

Great Thread!


----------



## herbn (Sep 17, 2005)

i have a 2x10 11-36 cassette and a 26-39 front, i run a long cage XT now, the bike came with a special mid xx sram,i think it's just a little longer than a reg mid.I like the long cage xt because i have access to every one of the 20 gears ,that's one the major selling points of 2x10, for me anyway. I'd say i'm in the big ring 75% of the time on the way out and in the small ring 75% of the time on the way back,kind of depends on the ride, seemed like that today.


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

alexzabr said:


> yet once again to beat a dead horse...
> I'm going to build my second bike which is going to serve my AM ambitions.
> Intend to put SLX dual ring crank + bashguard + chain guide and 11-34 cassette.
> The crank rings will be either 22/36 or 22/34 (right now I see SLX is offered in 22/36 combination, I think I'd rather prefer 22/34 but so far couldn't figure such).
> ...


for what it's worth, I run a 22/34 & 11-32 2x9 setup on my Niner... I run a medium cage X0 rear derailleur... absolutely great shifting with this setup. I run an SLX (and LX previously) crank. XT 22T, Race Face 34T rings. XG999 rear cassette. Sized my chain properly per the "big-big +2 links" rule of thumb. Very smooth. Never dropped a chain yet (properly adjusted derailleurs too - I'm almost obsessed with having well tuned derailleurs). Oh, and I used to run a KMC X10SL chain, now running an X11SL, and I find shifting is even better. Just needed to tweak the front derailleur limits a bit due to the slightly narrower chain. Otherwise, works perfectly.


----------



## deepakvrao (Mar 5, 2009)

I know this is an old thread, but I needed some help for a road bike.

My wife rides a road bike with Red shifters. We are planning some really steep climbs and wanted to get her an MTB cassette and RD.

Thought of the X9 10 speed RD, or even the X7 10 speed RD, and a 12-36 10 sp cassette PG1070

Will this work? Would I need a long cage or medium cage RD? Would the cable routing be a screw up?

SRAM website says that for 2*10 medium cage, and for 3*10 a long cage. So, as she is on a SRAM compact double, would a medium cage be correct?

Strangely SRAM does not give the wrap capacity on their website, but I found this on Performance Bikes website:

CAPACITY: 39T (Medium), 47T (Long) 
COMPATIBILITY: SRAM 10-speed mountain and road shifters
MAX. COG: 36T (Long)

So, if she has a 50/34 and a 12-36, that should need a wrap capacity of 40, and I should get away with the medium cage right?

HOWEVER, the first page of this thread says that capacity is as follows:

SRAM long = 43T; medium = 37T; short = 30T [from Speedub.Nates post]

So, if I want a 50/34 with a 12-36, should I get a medium or long cage x9?

I am new here but really would appreciate any help at all.


----------



## murrdogg11 (Apr 4, 2010)

I've done the math... i just wanted someone to confirm...
on a 1x10 setup with a 11-36 rear cassette short cage for the win?


----------



## DFYFZX (Jun 19, 2009)

murrdogg11 said:


> I've done the math... i just wanted someone to confirm...
> on a 1x10 setup with a 11-36 rear cassette short cage for the win?


Yarp


----------



## pedal2 (Oct 22, 2011)

Will an older (~2006-7) x.0 short cage work with with a 11-36 cassette in a 1x9 setup? 

(Probably running between 32 and 38 up front).


----------



## Sh4wn (Dec 3, 2011)

Great thread.

I trashed my RD today and I've been reading threads trying to get all my info. I'm 1x9 with a 11-34 in back but 12-36 on order.

I'm trying to find a 9s short cage compatible with 32F/36R. I had an XT RD on there and would like something on par or better. Is someone running this combo successfully? Which RD?


----------



## Noclutch (Jun 20, 2010)

My understanding is _any _short cage will cover _any _cassette _when_ run with a single up front.
I'm gonna try an X.9 short.


----------



## Sh4wn (Dec 3, 2011)

That would be great. A lot (incl. X.9 short) state 34T max rear cog, so it wasn't entirely clear with my 36T rear cog.


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

Most only allow for a 34 in the parallelogram, not only when you pull the cable does it go side to side but the thing has to move up and down at the same time. Unless you are using a 10 speed which is made for the bigger cassettes you'll have to adjust everything out (mostly the "B" screw} and you MAY end up with some ghost shifting and other errors when on the smaller cassette rings., most will take the amount of hain slack needed, but make sure you look at the Max Cassette Tooth count. I do believe they are making 9 speed derailleurs for the larger cassettes, just make sure the one you are buy will work.

here is a screen shot from Sram's tech manual... says 34 tooth max cassette..


----------



## Sh4wn (Dec 3, 2011)

Your post gave me the right keywords to find a related thread. Apparently the (or at least some) 34T RD's work with 36T:

I'm too new to post real links:
forums.mtbr.com
/650b-69er-new-wheel-trends/12-36-9-speed-cassette-650b-review-618525.html


----------



## Noclutch (Jun 20, 2010)

thomllama- I don't see the x.9 short listed there, but I'm holding one in my hands? pn 00.7515.044.020


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

Noclutch said:


> thomllama- I don't see the x.9 short listed there, but I'm holding one in my hands? pn 00.7515.044.020


Ya, Sram acts like the X9 short doesn't exist in all their tech sheets I've seen, I always refer to the X0 when looking for info...

by the way folks, I'm not saying it WONT work, just that it's not recommended.


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

hey, NoClutch, if you're going for it post up pics and any issues if you have any to get it to work.. about the only issue I can see is the "B" screw adj. Just a guess But i'm thinking you'll need to bring it in to about 4mm instead of 6 which is the norm at the 36 ring to keep it from being to far away at the smaller side of the cassette. Like to know/see how it works out.


----------



## Noclutch (Jun 20, 2010)

Thx thomllama and will do- I plan on installing it this week on a new build. I am using a 11-34 (XT) so hopefully set up will be uneventful. However I've stumbled upon threads talking about the X9's low scew interfering with the high adjustment (?), so I'll be real interested/anxious to see if that is the case or internet misinformation- like that ever happens


----------



## thomllama (Oct 3, 2007)

Noclutch said:


> Thx thomllama and will do- I plan on installing it this week on a new build. I am using a 11-34 (XT) so hopefully set up will be uneventful. However I've stumbled upon threads talking about the X9's low scew interfering with the high adjustment (?), so I'll be real interested/anxious to see if that is the case or internet misinformation- like that ever happens


never had an issue with my X9's.. been using them for yrs. converted more than a few people over from Shimano without issue.. actually less issues  Only thing I find annoying now is on the new units they moved the cable screw from right on front to the back behind the parallelogram and is kinda a ***** to get to and keep the cable tight.


----------



## EatingDirt (Jan 4, 2012)

Thanks for passing on the info people. I'm VERY HAPPY that I joined this forum. I'm a new/old guy getting back into riding. No longer into the roadbike thing. Just can't do it anymore. Anyways, this is VERY HELPFUL information. Thank you.:thumbsup:


----------



## Kiwimtbker (Sep 29, 2009)

*Saint Short Cage with 36T rear cassette*



Sh4wn said:


> Your post gave me the right keywords to find a related thread. Apparently the (or at least some) 34T RD's work with 36T:
> 
> I'm too new to post real links:
> forums.mtbr.com
> /650b-69er-new-wheel-trends/12-36-9-speed-cassette-650b-review-618525.html


Hey Sh4wn,

I originally had slx 22,32,44 chainrings with slx shadow rear derailleur long cage. Originally11-34T rear cassette. Converted over to 1x9. 32T front ring with 12-36T rear cassette - the slx shadow long cage works fine with 36T - just had to use B-screw adjustment. No problems with accurate shifting across the whole cassette.

I'd like to swap to short cage rear derailleur - Saint short cage. Tech Doc states it has a mode converter allowing 32-34T rear cassettes to be used. So assuming slx states 34T is max cassette ring and works fine hopefully saint will be the same.

Does anyone have any actual experience using saint short cage with 36T cassette? $200 is a lot to spend to get it wrong!


----------



## Kiwimtbker (Sep 29, 2009)

*Saint Short Cage with 36T rear cassette*

Hey Sh4wn and others

I originally had slx 22,32,44 chainrings with slx shadow rear derailleur long cage. Originally11-34T rear cassette. Converted over to 1x9. 32T front ring with 12-36T rear cassette - the slx shadow long cage works fine with 36T - just had to use B-screw adjustment. No problems with accurate shifting across the whole cassette.

I'd like to swap to short cage rear derailleur - Saint short cage. Tech Doc states it has a mode converter allowing 32-34T rear cassettes to be used. So assuming slx states 34T is max cassette ring and works fine hopefully saint will be the same.

Does anyone have any actual experience using saint short cage with 36T cassette? $200 is a lot to spend to get it wrong!


----------



## Sh4wn (Dec 3, 2011)

Apparently it's ok:

Will my short cage saint mech work with a 36t cassette? « Singletrack Forum


----------



## FireSpitter (Feb 15, 2012)

Hi guys,

I've gone through all pages, reading all posts, wasted 1 piece of paper but I still cannot understand the chart (How the numbers are gotten) but most importantly, I can't get the answer to a question I have.

I currently have a dual chainring setup 40/28 paired with a DuraAce 7900 shortcage RD. The spec list of the RD is:-

Maximum Sprocket 28T
Minimum Sprocket 11T
Maximum Front Difference 16T
Total Capacity 33T 

I would like to run a 11-32 MTB cassette but hopefully maintain using the same RD (For weight & cost reasons). Is this possible without having any of the gears in the "red zone"? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Kiwimtbker (Sep 29, 2009)

*Rear Deraileur Capacity*



FireSpitter said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> I've gone through all pages, reading all posts, wasted 1 piece of paper but I still cannot understand the chart (How the numbers are gotten) but most importantly, I can't get the answer to a question I have.
> 
> ...


Hey Firespitter,

Two important numbers to note. 28T maximum sprocket. This means ideally your largest rear cassette sprocket should be no bigger than 28T. You've stated that you want to run a 32T cassette. This MAY immediately give you an issue. You can use your B-screw on the derailleur to push the top derailleur pulley wheel further away from that 32T sprocket so that when your derailleur moves across the top pulley wheel does not crash straight into the largest sprocket but moves across underneath it - Shimano state there should be about 5mm clearance between the two. When pushed out to its maximum adjustment point this may not give you quite enough clearance (only trial and error would tell - I dont have any personal experience with this particular derailleur). Also, when pushed out this far the top pulley wheel will sit quite a distance away from the 11T sprocket when you shift across to the other end of the cassette - this MAY lead to inaccurate shifting (again, only trial and error will determine this). I use a 34T rear derailleur with a 36T cassette without any issues but pushing that a full 4T difference may be a step too far?

Secondly, the stated total capacity of your rear derailleur is 33T. This means that the derailleur has the ability to soak up 33 gear ratio units. You want to run a 40/28 double ring at the front. This means that there is a 12 unit difference between the two. You want to run a 11-32 rear cassette. This means a 21 unit difference. Add these two together and you get 33 unit difference. Think of it like this - if you started with the chain on the 40T front ring and the 32T rear sprocket it is going to be at its longest length. As you shift to 28T front and 11T rear the chain is now wrapped around the smallest two rings and the extra chain length has to go somewhere. Primarily what happens is that the bottom pulley wheel moves back and sits well to the rear of the top pulley wheel causing the chain to double back on itself. Thus the derailleur has soaked up this 33 unit difference. This 33 unit difference is right at the maximum stated capacity of your deraileur. This in itself is not a huge issue as Shimano is usually conservative about their deraileur capacities.

In theory you will have a few gearing choices available that will be in the red zone most notably when you are in 28 front and 11 rear (unlikely choice out on the trails). The main issue will be poor chain tension but nothing catastrophic. The only way to improve this chain tension would be to shorten your chain so that the bottom derailleur pulley wheel does not move so far rearward. This helps at this end but if you inadvertantly shift from being in 28 front and 32 rear to 40F and 32R and there is not enough chain length to cope then you could break your chain or snap something more important!

Hope this helps?
:thumbsup:


----------



## Ricci Chang (Jun 9, 2008)

I have been running 1x9 for 4+ years now and loving the simplicity of it. I always had 11-34T at rear, but change front ring from 32T or 34T (Fun race Day) to 36T or 38T (commute) alternately. Because of the large 38T front, I use Long Cage at rear and never had a single problem. I have used Medium Cage only when I run 32T or 34T front, and no problem as well. 
However, I have not used Short Cage on 12-36T rear. Medium Cage will be a safer bet, while give you some flexibility of altering front chain rings.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

Ricci Chang said:


> I have been running 1x9 for 4+ years now and loving the simplicity of it. I always had 11-34T at rear, but change front ring from 32T or 34T (Fun race Day) to 36T or 38T (commute) alternately. Because of the large 38T front, I use Long Cage at rear and never had a single problem. I have used Medium Cage only when I run 32T or 34T front, and no problem as well.
> However, I have not used Short Cage on 12-36T rear. Medium Cage will be a safer bet, while give you some flexibility of altering front chain rings.


So, you swap front rings ranging from 32t - 38t and use a 11-34 cassette?

(38-32)+(34-11) = (6)+(23) = 29t of chain wrap capacity needed. There is no reason you could not run a short cage for that. Even with a 12-36 cassette, a short would work fine.


----------



## funnyjr (Oct 31, 2009)

kapusta said:


> So, you swap front rings ranging from 32t - 38t and use a 11-34 cassette?
> 
> (38-32)+(34-11) = (6)+(23) = 29t of chain wrap capacity needed. There is no reason you could not run a short cage for that. Even with a 12-36 cassette, a short would work fine.


I was gonna say the same thing

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## jcaino (May 26, 2007)

kapusta said:


> So, you swap front rings ranging from 32t - 38t and use a 11-34 cassette?
> 
> (38-32)+(34-11) = (6)+(23) = 29t of chain wrap capacity needed. There is no reason you could not run a short cage for that. Even with a 12-36 cassette, a short would work fine.


Changing the single front ring doesn't change the required extra chain capacity, but does change the chain length. You would still have to take care when shortening a new chain to make sure it isn't too long or too short for either 38 or 32. A longer cage derailleur would give you some extra leeway without having to add links when switching to a 38.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

jcaino said:


> Changing the single front ring doesn't change the required extra chain capacity, but does change the chain length. You would still have to take care when shortening a new chain to make sure it isn't too long or too short for either 38 or 32. A longer cage derailleur would give you some extra leeway without having to add links when switching to a 38.


Go back and look at the calculation I showed. A short cage has more than enough capacity to accommodate going from a 32t to 38 tooth ring without needing to add or remove links.

Yes, you do need to be careful that you make the chain long enough to accommodate the 38t ring, but you need to do that regardless of what cage you use.


----------



## jrs67 (Dec 6, 2010)

*question on shiano medium cage derailleur*

I just picked up a medium cage shimano XT rear derailleur. will it work with this 1x9 combo: 39T up front and 11-32 rear cassette?


----------



## Svard75 (Sep 15, 2010)

Hi Guys, I'm running a 36/26 up front and a 11-32 out back. It's a full suspension but only 4" of travel. I am looking at replacing my long cage for a short cage and did the math.



came out to 31T for slack required. Given the rear suspension do you think a short cage would be sufficient?



Thanks

Sorry forgot to add that its a sram x0.


----------



## tHinkgREg (Oct 27, 2009)

*short cage work?*

Hi Nate - I've done the math per the equation you provided and I'm thinking that I might be out of spec for what I'm running. Just switched to an FSA 2x9 that's 40/27 and have a shimano cassette which is 11-32. that means 34T if I'm not mistaken. With that said, does my Shimano XT short cage become inadequate? Thanks!

-greg


----------



## OldschoolBMXer (Sep 25, 2008)

Hey Guys, at the risk of being lazy, I need to pull a trigger on a rear derailleur and want to run the medium cage Shimano M985 derailleur -- the setup would be 38/26T x 11-36T. The capacity of the Med cage on shimano site is 35T on the rear, my guess is that one more tooth is not going to be a big deal. Anyone running this setup right now? I am running the exact setup on another bike but using a long cage, but one of these days, I know that thing is going to hang on something.

much appreciated.


----------



## Mutly (Nov 6, 2009)

*Also consider this before cutting chain to length....*

If you are going to fit a rear mech whose range is going to be used on its maximum range, just below, or just above its range rating.......consider this........
When you fit your chain to the manufacturer's instructions, for example biggest chain ring to biggest cassette cog PLUS a pair of links..........that theiretical chain length does not always fall conveniently exactly to divide to the nearest pair of links. For example you may have to choose between splitting at approx 3/4 of a link pair of 1.3/4 of a link pair. Hmmm, should you split it a smidge short and hope that it will not stress the derailleur cage in big/big (before chain stretch soon reduces the compromise a little) ....or....should you play safe and split it long and hope that your chain does not go too slack in the small/small ring combination? 
Well, it is for you to judge, but be more careful running short if you have a long-travel full suspension bike with chain-growth tendency and more relaxed if you run a hardtail. The best tactic is to try it on the workstand and judge whether you are pushing the tolerance too much. 
If the difference is marginal, you could always split it long then remove a link pair after the chain has stretched past perhaps 0.60%.

Front mechs also have range ratings. If your front mech has a range that is significantly bigger than the chainring combination that you intend to use then you may have to fit the mech with greater clearance above the outer chain ring than is advised by the manufacturer. I run my winter hardtail 2x10 with an unusual close-ratio 26:36T up front that suits my local riding perfectly so I have to run the front mech (rated for use between 13T and 15T range) mounted high or else, when changing from small chain ring to the outer, the mech tries just to grind the chain into the side of the small chainring instead of pushing it off/away/above. (I also then run a nylon shim stuck under the roof of the front mech cage to help avoid the chain bouncing off the top of the big chainring on rough descents.) Shifts are good and that all that matters ultimately.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

Thanks, Joan!



Mutly said:


> Shifts are good and that all that matters ultimately.


I suppose...

...except that was what drove me to delve into this. Shifts were good with a long cage, but with a shorter cage they were BETTER. AND less chain slap. AND no broken drivetrain from running the chain too short.

...so, yeah, "good shifts" is good, but it shouldn't be the end of the discussion.


----------



## xsive (Aug 1, 2012)

Thanks, this thread quickly answered my questions about which cage that I need for a 42/30 + 34/11!!!


----------



## bigmike9699 (Aug 27, 2007)

I am building a new "racey" hardtail, and came across a SRAM XO short cage derailleur. I am a fairly fit rider, and am comfortable pushing "bigger gears". I am also a decent technical rider, being fairly aware of my gearing. My road bike runs a 50/36 x 12/28 with a SRAM Force short cage and it runs well. 

I am toying with two different front 2x10 options. One is a 42/28, the other a 39/26. I'd like to run an 11/32 in the rear, and this is how the math plays out:

1. (42-28) + (32-11) = 35
2. (39-26) + (32-11) = 34

The XO derailleur is a 2012 10 speed, short cage, and will be going on a hardtail. I have been told as well that the SRAM numbers are conservative, with people successfully running short cages in the 32-34 range, and still having sufficient chain tension in the small/small. I wouldn't have to factor in chain growth due to suspension, so the chain length would remain "fixed".

Just curious if anyone has had any experience running the new SRAM 10 speed short cage stuff with the larger gear ratios that you see on 2x10's. I am thinking for safety, I should probably go with my 11/28 road cassette that I have kicking around, which would factor out like this:

(42-28) + (28-11) = 31 or, 
(39-26) + (28-11) = 30 

Both of which are more safely within the ranges originally pointed out when the post started. That said, I think I would like the gearing better with the 11-32. 

Opinions? 

Thanks!!

-Mike


----------



## Dambala (Jan 22, 2011)

I am running a short cage XX Rear Der. with 40/28 front, 11-36 cassette with 80mm of rear travel very successfully.


----------



## fishwrinkle (Jul 11, 2012)

hi guys. sorry if this has been asked earlier, but how do i factor in for a 1x10 setup (36/11-36)? obviously the formula don't work that way.


----------



## lyndonchen (Nov 8, 2007)

fishwrinkle: the total capacity you need is 0+(36-11)=25. You can easily get away with a short cage.


----------



## Cossy (Aug 21, 2012)

Very well written explanation.thanks.


----------



## B.BL (Nov 6, 2005)

Hi guys!

I run 24/36 front and 11-36 rear. That would give a required chain capacity of 37.
I would like to install a shimano xt fd-m786 derailer, that has either 35 (med) or 43 (long) tooths capacity. 

The mid cage would not fit (2 tooths short) but could still work. Which one would you recommend, or do you have expericence with this setup?


----------



## Shmoo (Mar 9, 2008)

Anyone using a SRAM medium cage with a 38t according to the formula, eventhough it's rated at 37t? I'm at 39-26 = 13, 36-11 = 25, 38t. Just want to double check prior to ordering. Thanks.


----------



## danny110605 (Oct 12, 2013)

I simply want to know seen as you know what your talking about - I have a 22/32/44 at the front & 10 speed 13/36t cassette will my sram x9 medium cage work if my chain is the correct length?


----------



## Devincicx (Nov 20, 2011)

using a 11-36 cassette and 26-39 rings, I want to buy a new shimano XTR shadow+ rear derailleur for my hardtail. Given the price of the derailleur, I dont want to mispick it. Long or med cage? Which one is the go?


----------



## Ridgeway (Oct 21, 2013)

I have just put a medium cage SRAM X9 rear deraillure on a 44/22 - 32/11 setup. Using the formula I should be on 43T but the medium cage works just fine and I could still take another link out of my chain if I needed to. Rules are made to be broken I guess, I just hope nothing else gets broken (chain, deraillure, arms, legs) will let you know.


----------



## Siege (Oct 7, 2011)

Can anyone comment on whether or not I would need to worry about chain growth on this FS bike?

Spark 29 Pro - SCOTT Sports

It seems to me that the geometry of the suspension would imply that the chain distance would be at its largest with the rear suspension UN compressed.


----------



## Odie1974 (Jun 17, 2013)

Hi,

I need to resurrect the thread. Can you please confirm one thing for me?
I am planning to run 2 x 10 drivetrain on a Giant Trance X 29er (full sus).
The tooth count is as follows: 22 - 36 front, 11-36 back.

According to the formula, the result is 39 T. 
I have a SRAM X9 Type 2 10sp rear derailleur w/ the MEDIUM cage.
According to this site, it should work:
BTI | products matching "sram rear derailleur" (page 1)

But I read somewhere that a long cage RD would be better for my setup...

SO te questions is will MED cage work for me?

Thanks


----------



## jennifer012904 (Oct 29, 2012)

Okay, So I have been running a 3X10 22/33/44 front with 11/36 rear. 

Have been using a long cage SLX.. After some reading and wanting to upgrade the rear derailleur to a better unit I bought a 2014 Saint which is supposed to have a medium cage.. I switch to a 2X10 (26/39) with the 11/36 rear to try to get the right chain to sprocket ratio for the Saint to take up all the slack.. 

No Luck.. I went with the SAint to get a beefier unit.. But it seems i'm out of luck.. 

The amount of slack when I use it as a 2X10 with the rear is beyond slop.. Works fine with just the middle ring or small ring with the chain the right length.. But won't work with both..


----------



## bill rogers (May 18, 2014)

so i have a giant reign with a 3x9 setup and looking to buy a sram x9 rear derailleur but dont know what one i kneed short medium or long plz plz help


----------



## kc2 (May 22, 2014)

*Mixing SRAM X0 gears with Shimano XTR rear derailleur & shifters - which cage size?*

Hi ,

I'm wanting to put Shimano XTR shifters and rear derailleur (M980 & 986) onto my 2x10 bike which currently has SRAM X0 components as follows:

Chainset: SRAM X0 2.2 PF30, 175mm, 42t x 28t
Cassette: SRAM PG-1050, 11t-36t, 10-speed

According to the helpful posts here, it seems I need to take up 39T capacity.

The XTR seems to come in 2 cage capacities: "GS" at 35T, and SGS with 41T capacity, so arithmetically, it look likes I would need SGS...

...but I got a bit confused with the references to SRAM being "conservative", and given my sprockets are S-RAM, could I get away with the shorter GS version?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## macming (Oct 31, 2004)

Speedub.Nate said:


> You've got a medium cage. Sram makes a short cage mountain derailleur in the X.0 line, but only goes as low as a medium in the X.9.
> 
> Quick answer: The medium cage will work, but you'll drop your chain if you accidentally shift to the small-small combo. Suspension *could* be a factor, depending on how much "chainstay growth" your frame experiences as your suspension cycles.
> 
> ...


So if I run a 1 x 10 setup with a 11 - 36 cassette, I can get away with a short cage RD?


----------



## Superd06 (Jan 4, 2016)

macming said:


> So if I run a 1 x 10 setup with a 11 - 36 cassette, I can get away with a short cage RD?


I assume (and hope), by now (almost one yr later) you found out yes you can.


----------



## Superd06 (Jan 4, 2016)

and now for my question, which is more of a request for confirmation. I've been running a hardtail 1x10 for sometime with a medium cage, no prob. just recently bought my first FS. came 2x10 with a long cage (11-36 cassette). I converted to 1x on that as well: 36T front. now........

-IF I understood everything I read in the past 11 pages, a short cage would work fine on the basis of simply running a single ring so rear spread is only 25. 
-2ndly, as long as I remove all the air (or rear shock completely) and cycle thru the suspension to then proceed with chain measurement (which is the actual key issue), cage length is still irrelevant?

just want to make sure before I order the short cage, considering the bike came with a long.


----------



## rihom (Dec 4, 2020)

*Thank you*

It is simply a brilliant reading! Thank you so much for the effort of writing this thorough explanation. It helped me a lot.


----------



## HTail (Jan 29, 2004)

*Reminiscing*

Wow, your post triggered lots of good memories of banter around derailleurs and triple chainring drivetrains! Though my last mountain bike is now some 10+ years old, someday my next bike will thankfully have a single chainring!


----------

