You are hereForums / By Discipline / Mountain (off road) / MTB Gear / 2x10 vs 3x10
2x10 vs 3x10
As the topic indicates, what is the opinion/consensus on 2x10's vs 3x10's???
i myself have both and i have found that considerably more leg power/stamina is required running a 2x10 than 3x10 (but perhaps that's because i am just unfit???)
can anyone comment on there experience???
thanks in advance 
- Login to post comments
- Bookmark & share
Tags
2x10.
Small ring for slow tight stuff.
Big ring for fast flowing stuff.
Simple.
I went to Ourimbah where Specialized was having their Test The Best Day and all of the bikes I rode were 2x10. On that track I found that it was fine but on steeper courses/trails I felt I would have been looking for a lower gear. When I mentioned this to one of the bike mechanics he told me that the 2x10 had the same range as the 3x9 which was contrary to what I hab previously read in AMB. I agree with you I do not think the gearing is as low as the 3x9.
Just switched to 2 x 10. Love the simplicity of being able to leave it in the big ring and use the whole cluster.
I'm fairly lazy and was finding once I got into middle ring I was just slipping up to the lower gears and spinning like mad because they were there. With the 2 x 10 I find I'm more likely to hold a good cadence and push the higher gear
@Wayno... that's just complete BS:
Really... do these people think we are stupid?
3x9 lowest gear (front/rear) is usually 22/34, highest is 44/11. This is a range between 0.65:1 and 4:1 or 518%
2x9 lowest gear (with 26/39 crank) is 26/36, highest is 39/11. This is a range between 0.72:1 and 3.55:1 or 390%
That second ratio percentage is basically unchanged with the 28/42 crank option although the actual ratios are higher of course.
Doh!
Personally I can see that 2x10 has a place for racers but your average punter will really appreciate the extra range 3 rings gives.
Been running 2 x 9 for about 5 years now and loved it (26 / 36) took a bit of getting used too knowing lowest gear was 26/32 but all good after 2 months. Made the legs work a bit harder but thats not a bad thing
Now got new bike running 3 x 10 last 3 months, am yet to use the granny ring....and miss the bash ring. So far thinking I'll be changing it to 2 x 10 with bash ring as soon as the first chainring needs replacing. The 10 speed system is way better than 9 but if I'm not using the granny on Sydneys rocky steep sections why keep it.
I have a 2 x9 setup at the moment and been really happy with it, enjoy the extra ground clearance it gives and will eventually go to a 10 onthe rear and I wouldn't want to go back to a triple ring up front.
I'm running 28-42
I didn't really use granny that much so the 28-36 feels pretty good at the low end
and the 42-11 was still good enough to let me pedal up over 60kmh down Hwalls
Two by 9/10 is great.
I have just switched from riding SS to 2 x 9 and except for a period of about 6 months three years ago SS is all I have ridden for the last five years.
But I have now been on the 2 x 9 for a few weeks and its great I am running (27/40) up front with a 12 - 32 rear cluster (I dropped the inefficient 11T cog from a standard cluster and added a 13T cog) I have a dead straight chain line with the 27x18 combo which is a great gear for cruising and the 40 up front is good for really hammering along and can be dumped for the 27 in a flash when an easier option is needed.
If I was concerned about lack of range with my 2 chainring setup then an 11-36 cassette (I don’t see the point of these personally) would be the what I would use but I find my 12 - 32 out back has more than enough gear combos for any situation.
As for leg power and stamina to ride a 2x9/10 well there’s nothing wrong with getting fit and learning how to ride your bike out of the saddle riding SS has taught me that really you dont need a whole bunch of gears and really a lot of mountain bikers change gears way too often and chose there granny gear in too many situations.
Two ring cranks have hit the mainstream and thats great as now its a whole lot easier to get a crank with the front rings I want.
As for 3 rings up front not for me thanks.
Yes, I thought the same when he said it but I was too interested in riding the bike than debating it with him at the time. Not to mention that my knowledge on the subject was somewhat lacking.
I am somewhat envious of those of you who can push those bigger gears. I suppose I will just have to get fitter and stronger.
I'seen the sh!t you ride off and up and I admire that !
I ride with 1X9. The only time I ever has an issue is when riding long fire trails and roads and I want to go faster. Currently my front cog is a 32 but I want to put a 34 on. You don't need granny gears, you get much stronger without them. I am only 5,8'' and 68kgs. My bike weighs over 14kg So it should require granny gears. You just get used to not having them. Each to their own I say. 2X10 would be my choice but I would get annoyed with a front derailleur very quickly
No specific experience with 2x10, but it's in the mail.
I did the math on the ratios and the way I like to think of it is that you lose 2 gears over 3x9.
Where you choose to lose them comes down to the chain ring and cassette combo.
What I've got coming will drop one off the bottom and one off the top. Not so concerned about losing the top end but even though the lowest combo rarely gets used I have memories of it being indispensible at times. I'll see how I go.....
I'm running 1 x 9 with a 36t front and 11-32 rear so it's pretty high gearing but it isn't an issue. There's always a few points where you COULD use a lower gear but never that you NEED to. The steepest hills I'd ride regularly are heartbreak at the dam or the quarry climb at the cascades and it's fine for a seated climb on both of those.
It certainly keeps you a little more honest by not letting you take the easy option which I think is a good thing. Having said that I might run a 11-34 cassette at Capital Punishment for when my legs are shagged (which will be at about the 20 km mark)
I'm not sure there is a choice as to where to loose ratios that much on 2x10 (when compared to 3x9).
At the top end 3x9 has 44/11, a ratio of 4:1. The largest 2x10 combo is 42/11 which is only 3.82:1.
At the low end 3x9 has 22/34, a ratio of 0.65:1. The smallest 2x10 combo is 26/36 (which requires different cranks to the above I might add) which is only 0.72:1.
So you will loose from the top and loose from the bottom no matter which 2x10 combo you go for.
Stand up and ride.
Heartbreak hill is easy as with the 27x18.
When I chose 2 x 9 I really wasn’t concerned with the loose of ratios especially when it comes to the lower gears.
In my case 3 chain rings up front is just to many gears and on the rear 9 is more than enough (I will switch to 10 when I cant buy a nice 9 speed cassette any more) I also swapped out the 11t cog on my cassette as its just pointless on a 29er and its really not all that efficient anyway and as for a 34 but more so 36 well they are just plain silliness.
I don’t look at it as loosing choice but gaining the ability to do away with an excess of unwanted gear options that in reality are just not needed if you are even half way fit.
Change gears less often and ride the bike I say.
Rob there is a 44/30 crank available for 2x10 as well. So you don't have to lose from the top.
I was not trying to be precisely mathematical about it.
Maybe it would have been more correct for me to say you lose the lowest gear and then it's up to you where you lose the other one.
So besides the changing of ratios, if the only other benefit a weight saving and if so, how much weight are we talking?
Maybe I am a whole lot less of a man than you are but there have been times where 22/34 has been a blessing. I'll happily confess to using this on the hills at the latter part of the Fling. As were most of the other riders around me, which I would describe as the fit recreational end of the field (eg 6hrs mark).
I don't think it's quite as easy to write off the lower gears as what you make out.
Weight wasn't such an issue with me as simplicity
with a 3 x9 you really have only about 14 distinct gears and need to watch crossing the chain so if you were in 3 at the front and 2 at the back it's the same as being in 2 at the front and 5 at the back but with a crossed chain line which tends to wear things out more.
With the 2 x 10 the 42 tooth is in the usual position as a middle ring so it more able to cope with the extremes of the cassette. That means I can leave it in big ring and have to think about dropping into middle while come back up at the back as I go past the center of the cassette
Write them off you don't need them you just think you do.
Changed over two a 2x9 (26/36 up front 11/32 rear)about 6 months ago and havent look back. I'm toying with the idea of going 1x9 next any recommendation for what to run up front ?
I find that the granny is helpfull especially up really steep stuff, I do however push the Big Ring as well though, I may consider a switch, however at this stage I doubt it.
My current bike has a 2 x 10 (SRAM XO 26/39 11-36) which I like but do not love.
In practical terms I find I'm riding in the big ring for about 90% of the time and even when I'm in the small ring I don't go lower than 3 or 4 which is pretty much the same as the big ring and 1- so clearly I could do without the smaller chainring ( yes, and stand up).
I do find my pedalling feels a bit more torquey (as in it "feels more pulling power") in the small chainring, but in mechanical terms that has to be an illusion as the gear ratios are the same.
However: the 10-speed chain has broken on me 3 times.
I think for the riding around Sydney, where we have lots of sand and grit, these 10-speed chains aren't strong enough.
So Adam, my recommendation is to go 2 x 9 and get with the strength
I've been running 2 x 10 since the middle of last year.
@Rob is correct in that you lose some top and bottom end gearing compared with 3 x 9 setup. I'm running a 27/42 chain ring combo with 11/36 cassette. If you do the calc's on the easy gears one complete revolution of my 27 front/ 36 rear = 1.56m rollout. If you used 22 front /30 rear on a 3 x 9 setup you get 1.52m rollout so my easiest gear is very similar to the second easiest gear on a 3 x 9 setup which is no big deal. If you can't get up a hill with that combo you can actually walk faster. Similarly I lose a little on top speed but quite frankly the only time I see my 42 front/11 rear combo is going down hill in which case i'm usually freewheeling while I suck in the oxygen to recover before I go again.
@Flynny is spot on with the main reasons for going to (and in my case staying with) 2 x 10. I find I don't look down much to check what gear i'm in now. I used to constantly be glancing down to make sure i kept a pretty straight chain line but now I use the whole range and really do 95% of my riding in the big ring. The small ring only gets a look in on a very steep climb or during an enduro race when a moderate climb feels like a steep one. Having said that, it's obviously not for everyone. I ride heaps so have the strength to ride around in the big ring. If you don't have the legs then the range of a 3 x 9 or 3 x 10 is the way to go.
Now for a shameless plug for my sponsor - FRM make a light weight crank set that can be set up with 2 or 3 chain rings. I tried a set last year and from memory when changing from the 3 to 2 system the rings bolt to the same location as the small and middle ring and there are 4 little round spacers that go in behind the bolts in place of the large ring.
2x10 is maybe something I'll look at the sram make a 10spd grip shift
I'm running 1 x 9 with a 28t (Widgit) front and 11-34 rear so it's pretty low gearing. I'm over the hill and It's pretty hilly and tight around here. I typically only run out of gears on sealed sections.
http://www.widgit.com.au/
"The Widgit single chainring set-up bridges the gap between 22 tooth "granny" and 32 tooth "middle" ring, with a choice of 28, 30, 32, 34 tooth sprokets"
I'd recommend the 30 or 32 for the faster/fitter rider.
Thanks for all the responses !!! have been really good info and appreciate all your opinions and advice
127kg 6'7" kinda doesn't look right on a bicycle 
I rode Wingello on Sunday and couldn't make it up "the wall" f**K what a hill...
Power is not an issue for me, it is the cadence i struggle with, i can't seem to spin much and tend to rely on my power to push me through however as you can appreciate this fades on a longer ride....
perhaps i just need to lose some weight
I've thought 34 teeth on the front would be ideal, particularly on a 11-34 cluster. Any less than that and I'd be worried about losing too much top speed. I find the 36 is fine at the top and the bottom and I'm by no means super fit or strong. The bike had a 1 x 9 on it when I got it so I just kept it in place and have grown to love it, it originally had a 40t front but that was just too much for me.