# 1x9 Okay for Beginner?



## jeffpm (Jan 19, 2014)

Greetings all.

I am a beginner biker and I'm in the market for a new bike (coming from a 2008 Trek 3700). I've been considering lots of different bikes, but I came across an interesting find on Craigslist that I'd like to get your opinion on.

It's a 2008 Specialized Stumpjumper running 1x9. Do you think a beginner biker would be okay with a 1x9 bike? Is it doable to tackle climbs and descents with that gearing? I'm looking to be doing some general XC riding.

Thanks!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

LOL, I think 1x9 is stupid for everybody. But one of my usual routes starts with 1000' of climbing.

Only the lowest few gears are unique to the granny ring. If you can go for a ride and pretty much stay in your middle ring, it's probably fine. If you're in your granny a lot and you're not cross-chained, it may totally suck. At least, if it's a 32t chainring or bigger.

Does the add give the tooth count out have non-sucky pictures?


----------



## Gouda Cheez (Feb 18, 2013)

My first bike (current bike) is a 1x10. I thought it was gonna suck but I've adapted. I do some climbing (quite a bit in my book but probably not for others) and I have to problem climbing steep and rocky terrain. 

All depends on your terrain.


----------



## borabora (Feb 16, 2011)

If you consider yourself reasonably strong and athletic then you'll be fine. If you are overweight and out of shape then you'll suffer on climbs or will have to walk. As mentioned by others the amount of climbing you plan to do is important as well. 

Gears don't reduce the amount of energy you have to generate to make a climb but low gears help shift some of the work from fast twitch (strength) muscles to slow twitch (endurance) muscles. 

Some of us love 1x setups because they are lighter, cheaper, simpler, more reliable and quieter. But it's never black or white.


----------



## jeffpm (Jan 19, 2014)

I very rarely go to the granny ring. I like the idea of 1x9 for the simplicity and because the front derailleur on my current bike is a pain. 

The ad doesn't have a tooth count, but I did request it from the seller. What would be the ideal count? The trails in my area don't have huge ascents, so I won't be doing a TON of climbing.


----------



## smilinsteve (Jul 21, 2009)

It depends on what you want to do. 
If everything you plan on riding is flat, 1x9 is too many gears 

Your profile says Richmond Virginia. I've never been, but I picture hills. If you do 1x9 I would make sure you have low enough gears for all your climbs, and sacrifice on the high gears ( since you can always make it _down_ a hill regardless of your gearing!)


----------



## borabora (Feb 16, 2011)

You probably want a 32t or 33t ring in the front. Cassette size is also relevant. It's probably a 11-34. And I assume that this a 26er. That gives you better gearing due to the wheel size when compared to 29. (Coming to think of it I own a 2008 SJ full-suspension bike. I don't ride it much since I prefer my 29er.) Stock on most SJs was a triple 22/33/44 and you'll want to find out if he converted the stock crankset or replaced it.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Some people have spiderless 1x setups with 28t rings, and things like that. That's starting to be a pretty unusual drivetrain setup and I think it begins to make real sacrifices in top end, but it's also less and less of a sacrifice in terms of low end gears.

I think of a 32 or 34 as being more typical. These bolt onto cranks that use a more typical four-arm spider, can be run as part of an inexpensive conversion, etc.

Bikes priced well on Craig's List go quickly, at least in my region. So don't drag your feet about this (or any) bike.

Bear in mind that your 3700 fits differently from a higher-end XC bike. Don't buy a bike if the fit's off, no matter how good the deal seems.

I wouldn't expect a 32t ring to be too small for most descents. Most of the time, if I used the large ring on a triple on a descent, it was either to do with the shift pattern or to increase the chain tension. Not about gear ratio.


----------



## Flyin_W (Jun 17, 2007)

AndrwSwitch said:


> LOL, I think 1x9 is stupid for everybody...


Whoa... Let's try to put the wheels back on the beginner's bus!
As one who's taught many a newbie, and now rides most everything on a rigid SS, I must disagree.
The single biggest problem I see when people are first learning to ride is confusion. From in part too many gears.

The first time someone gets aboard a MTB, notice their deer in the headlights look from trying to absorb all this.. "Right hand controls the rear, left hand controls the front, easy on the front brake, to shift - take pressure off the pedals, when coasting - feet horizontal, heavy on the pedals / light on the seat, elbows flexed, don't death-grip, to clear stuff unweight the front wheel, stay off the brakes in the corners..." Total info overload!! :eekster:

To make it easier, I tell people to stick in in the middle ring, and leave it. The same mass must go up the same hill, whether you have one gear or thirty - all must sit, stand or walk.

Recently got my noobie g/f a bike, and believe she would learn fastest on a rigid SS. 
Built a SS frame as a 1x10 (n/w) because of extended climbs, and installed a 100mm fork for chunk. Really want her to learn handling, braking, and line selection before being confused by shifting.

Know anyone who constantly cross-chains? I do, they have constant drivetrain issues, and have ridden for years. 
IMO - Until you understand gear ratios, redundancy, chainline, and how to unweight pedals - multiple chainrings are more of a complication than they are a benefit.


----------



## moefosho (Apr 30, 2013)

I used my last 1x9 setup (30T front, 11-34) for just about everything, except for huge mountain climbs.
If you go to the single speed forum, they will inform you that you only need 1 gear. 

The good news is, if you dont like 1x9 you can always go back.


----------



## jeffpm (Jan 19, 2014)

Thanks for the advice and suggestions all. I ended up buying the bike today after test riding it and really enjoying the ride. After that I took it on a small trail and it felt great!!


----------



## Gouda Cheez (Feb 18, 2013)

Enjoy it!


----------



## canker (Jul 26, 2007)

You can get a 12-36 cassette for 9 speed, just bought one because I'm hoping to go 1x9 on one of my bikes. I also plan to pick up one of the race face narrow wide 30 tooth cranks rings that fits the common 104 BCD cranks. Not up to it yet though.


----------



## SAthirtythree (May 22, 2013)

go 1x9 you'll be fine. I switched last year, I'm NEVER going back.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## jeffpm (Jan 19, 2014)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Pics or it didn't happen.


Only took one pic yesterday from the left side, but here it is. Chain ring is 32 and cassette is 11-34.


----------



## mack_turtle (Jan 6, 2009)

2 suggestions about that bike:

1. ditch those crappy pedals asap. there is an abundance of decent, strong, grippy flat pedals out there. if you want a slightly cheaper, but probably heavier option, look into bmx pedals.

2. what kind of chainring does that bike have? if it has the standard middle ring from a 3x setup still on there, there is a good chance it will drop the chain easily. a dedicated single speed specific chain would work a lot better. some sort of chain keeper like the one made by Paul or MRP would be very helpful too. but even better would be one of the newer generation of "no drop" chainrings with the wide/narrow teeth. look into that.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

mack_turtle said:


> 2 suggestions about that bike:
> 
> 1. ditch those crappy pedals asap.


+1. Even an all plastic pedal is better IMO, not that I recommend those either. Those alloy cages screw directly into plastic, a guaranteed fail and crappy performance until they do.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

Flyin_W said:


> - multiple chainrings are more of a complication than they are a benefit.


BS.. Multiple chain rings can mean the difference between having to push the bike up every hill and being able to ride it up a hill. New riders don't want to walk their bikes everywhere. They want to ride and even if they are going slow just pedaling up a hill is an accomplishment. Gears help you do that. I have been taking out a new rider over the past few months. He is a runner so has good lungs, but weak legs. I have taught him how to use gears and it allows him to make it up alot of tough climbs. He is not fast, but he is making it and that is valuable for him. His first bike was my old spare one from 1998. It ran a 11-28 7spd rear with triple chainring. He struggled on some steep climbs even in granny. So when he bough his own bike I was careful to point out a 11-34 9spd with 22/32/44 triple to give him that low granny he needed for steep smooth climbs. Now he is able to make it up alot more climbs by spinning up them with cadence rather than brute force.

As for working the chain rings it is easy
Small = Climbing, Long and steep stuff
Middle = Flats, gentle climbs, flats and most descents
Big = Pavement, graded roads, or fast descents.


----------



## jeffpm (Jan 19, 2014)

mack_turtle said:


> 2 suggestions about that bike:
> 
> 1. ditch those crappy pedals asap. there is an abundance of decent, strong, grippy flat pedals out there. if you want a slightly cheaper, but probably heavier option, look into bmx pedals.
> 
> 2. what kind of chainring does that bike have? if it has the standard middle ring from a 3x setup still on there, there is a good chance it will drop the chain easily. a dedicated single speed specific chain would work a lot better. some sort of chain keeper like the one made by Paul or MRP would be very helpful too. but even better would be one of the newer generation of "no drop" chainrings with the wide/narrow teeth. look into that.


I'm planning on getting some MG-1s.

The guy included a chainkeeper as well, but he said he had problems with it so he took it off. I'm not sure if the chainring is a dedicated single speed or not. How can I tell?


----------



## Flyin_W (Jun 17, 2007)

^ Yeah right. This is why the geared MTB market is going to 1x10's narrow-wide with clutch derailleurs. :-\ And dropping 3 x systems like a big smelly turd. BTW somehow this old fart rides SS most everywhere.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Flyin_W said:


> ^ Yeah right. This is why the geared MTB market is going to 1x10's narrow-wide with clutch derailleurs. :-\ And dropping 3 x systems like a big smelly turd. BTW somehow this old fart rides SS most everywhere.


...and as we're all well aware, the "The Market" and crusty old SSers know exactly what's best for each and every one of us.

And seriously, if somebody is really completely thrown for a loop and pushed past the breaking point by the complication of running 2 front gears rather of one, they're probably a bit too short on brainpower to be allowed to go into the woods by themselves.

OP - bike looks good. I wouldn't change a damn thing (besides the pedals) until you've had a chance to put some miles on it and see if there are actually any issues you need to fix, or if you feel you need to change gearing or possibly even add ring(s)and a derailleur up front. And always be wary of people trying to push the 'latest and greatest' and/or their personal preferences as a solution to 'problems' you may or may not even have. Just go and start riding the hell out of your bike and things will shake themselves out from there.


----------



## borabora (Feb 16, 2011)

Very nice bike. You'll love it. I mentioned above that I also have a 2008 SJ. Mine is a FS bike and I politely decided not to mention that I think the rear suspension is fairly sub-optimal. So, I am glad to see that yours turns out to be a hard tail. In my opinion a much better bike than the FS.

Ride as is but if you ever have to get a new derailleur then make sure to get a short cage for better shifting. It would also be pretty easy to convert to 1x10 but I think not too useful unless you want to go to a type 2 derailleur.

Have fun!!


----------



## Flyin_W (Jun 17, 2007)

slapheadmofo said:


> ...and as we're all well aware, the "The Market" and crusty old SSers know exactly what's best for each and every one of us.
> 
> *And seriously, if somebody is really completely thrown for a loop and pushed past the breaking point by the complication of running 2 front gears rather of one, they're probably a bit too short on brainpower to be allowed to go into the woods by themselves.*


slapjomama, This is the beginners forum, where one tries to simplify, and shorten their learning curve. 
Only a narcissistic egomaniac lacking common sense would post such blatant hatred... 
" I bet you're about as fun to ride with as a wet brown fart."

OP, nice looking ride - you did well.


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Flyin_W said:


> This is the beginners forum, where one tries to simplify, and shorten their learning curve. .


Sure, but I don't think you need to necessarily conflate 'beginner' with ' completely inept'. I've been getting people into riding for decades; by no means have they all been MENSA candidates, but I've yet to run into anyone that really got put off by the workings of a front derailleur, or gears in general. Mabye if we were talking about little kids, but I have faith that the vast majority of adults aren't going to have a lot of difficulty developing the ability to shift between 2 chainrings in pretty short order.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Wow, this thread is starting to go sideways.

OP, nice bike.  Enjoy it.

There are a couple ways to tell a multispeed chainring vs. a singlespeed chainring.

Multispeed chainrings typically have pins in the ring to help pick up the chain from a smaller ring. There would be two pairs of them. There's usually also some machining on the inner face that does the same thing.

Multispeed rings also have a lot of different tooth profiles going on, to facilitate shifts in both directions. If some of the teeth look different from the others, they're probably part of a shift gate. They'd be in clusters. Teeth do break, but that tends to look different.

If you look at a traditional singlespeed ring, they look very plain next to a multispeed ring. The teeth are a little taller and they're all the same as one another, and the inner face of the ring has much less going on.

I'm not really familiar with narrow/wide rings, beyond knowing that they exist, but I doubt you have one - they're fairly new.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

AndrwSwitch said:


> LOL, I think 1x9 is stupid for everybody. But one of my usual routes starts with 1000' of climbing.


I almost always agree with you Andrew, but I gotta disagree on this one. With a 1x9 or 1x10 you get the best of both worlds. You get a setup with a very low gear, a high enough gear (27-28 mph for me), simplicity, light weight, and no chain drops. I don't see this as stupid. If the OP was to put a 36 on his bike with a 32 front ring it would be like granny on the small ring with a 32 cassette.

OP- Enjoy the bike and if you have trouble climbing look at getting a 36 big gear on the cassette. I would also install a MRP guide or a competitor to MRP because without it, I drop my chain. With it, the setup is flawless.


----------



## jeffpm (Jan 19, 2014)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Wow, this thread is starting to go sideways.
> 
> OP, nice bike.  Enjoy it.
> 
> ...


I looked at the chainring again, and it's a Salsa 32T. The description says it's good for both single speed and multi use, so I should be good with this chainring, right?



Rod said:


> I almost always agree with you Andrew, but I gotta disagree on this one. With a 1x9 or 1x10 you get the best of both worlds. You get a setup with a very low gear, a high enough gear (27-28 mph for me), simplicity, light weight, and no chain drops. I don't see this as stupid. If the OP was to put a 36 on his bike with a 32 front ring it would be like granny on the small ring with a 32 cassette.
> 
> OP- Enjoy the bike and if you have trouble climbing look at getting a 36 big gear on the cassette. I would also install a MRP guide or a competitor to MRP because without it, I drop my chain. With it, the setup is flawless.


Thanks for the advice. I'm hoping to hit a beginner trail this weekend (weather permitting), so I'll see how I do on any climbs. The chain has this Salsa guard installed. Should that suffice?


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

jeffpm said:


> I looked at the chainring again, and it's a Salsa 32T. The description says it's good for both single speed and multi use, so I should be good with this chainring, right?
> 
> Dunno. If it throws the chain a lot, you'll know. If it's reliable, don't sweat it.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Rod said:


> I almost always agree with you Andrew, but I gotta disagree on this one. With a 1x9 or 1x10 you get the best of both worlds. You get a setup with a very low gear, a high enough gear (27-28 mph for me), simplicity, light weight, and no chain drops. I don't see this as stupid. If the OP was to put a 36 on his bike with a 32 front ring it would be like granny on the small ring with a 32 cassette.
> 
> OP- Enjoy the bike and if you have trouble climbing look at getting a 36 big gear on the cassette. I would also install a MRP guide or a competitor to MRP because without it, I drop my chain. With it, the setup is flawless.


Luckily, we don't have to agree on everything.

My old bike had a 22/34 low - it's set up 3x9 and while I suppose I could get an 11-36 cassette for it now, those came out fairly recently. I ran the ratios a while ago, when this topic came up. (which it does every ten minutes in one form or another  ) There are actually a fair number of unique ratios in a 22t granny. Four or five, IIRC. I use all my low ratios when I ride. I find I don't miss the 22/34 as much as I thought I would now that my 'A' bike is a 29er with a 24/36 low, but I'm just as happy not to give up any more low gears.

So that's my context.

For a bit more background, I have a very rapid cadence. I don't really know off-road, but on the road, I often spin over 100 rpm. I take extended climbs seated or alternating, so it's important to me to be able to take at least most of a long climb at 80+ rpm, without blowing up my heart. For purposes of having fun, I'm just as happy not to have to pin it to finish climbs.

The thing that bothers me about a 1x is just the loss of generality. With a triple and, to only a slightly lesser extent, with a double, I feel like I almost always get to approach climbs on my terms and ride my ride. Whether I'm trying to be mellow or Stravaciding them. I like having some super-low gears for managing traction too. I find it easier to stay smooth if my cadence isn't totally tanked.

Can't say I think a 42t ring is terribly useful off-road though.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

AndrwSwitch said:


> ...The thing that bothers me about a 1x is just the loss of generality. With a triple and, to only a slightly lesser extent, with a double, I feel like I almost always get to approach climbs on my terms and ride my ride. Whether I'm trying to be mellow or Stravaciding them. I like having some super-low gears for managing traction too. I find it easier to stay smooth if my cadence isn't totally tanked.
> 
> Can't say I think a 42t ring is terribly useful off-road though.


Same here. I am not using my 22/34 as much as I used to, but man it it nice to have. Know my 32/34 is not low enough to all me to spin at 90rpm up some climbs the way I like. So why do I want give it up? Why is giving up a my bail out gears an "upgrade"?

Now my 44 chain ring is usefully only for pavement or fast roads, but I can tell you at race time when there is a fast downhill paved road at the end of the race it is nice to get into that big ring push some big speeds and not spin at 110 rpm.

I know 1x systems work for some riders, but I like having options and range. Heck even my road bike has a triple. I tend to not use the 30t very much on that, but I it nice to have so I don't need push if I am total winded and broken. I prefer to ride my bike than push if possible.


----------

