Q45 - Has anyone tried Sram Eagle GX 10-50?

cpml123

Zen MBB Master
I am curious if anyone has changed the RD set up to Eagle GX 10-50 12 speed on the new Q45. That seems to be a really good setup (although expensive) to pair with 1x front. I imagine it's pretty much equivalent to having a 50/34 front but without the hassle of FD and weight.
 

benphyr

Guru-me-not
Do people not have the issue with ratios that they used to talk about all the time. When comparing a triple or double to a single you loose the extra ratios? How close of ratios is deemed acceptable?
 

super slim

Zen MBB Master
I will be staying with my Triples, so the max difference between changes is only 12% , Not 17% to 21%!!!!!
 

DavidCH

In thought; expanding the paradigm of traversity
Gosh ... I have such distant memories of my triple . I used one on my cruzbike conversion bike. It's still old and dirty in a plastic bag. Good job that bag doesn't disintegrate. I couldn't believe I rode with that... it was so heavy and with a twist grip.

Just wondered what the lightest triple is? It sure isn't mine. I am interested in the 12 speed too. The chainwheel on the 12 speed looks really small instead of my daisy cutter.
 

super slim

Zen MBB Master
937 gms for a FSA Gossamer Mega Expo (aluminium U shaped solid) cranks cut down to 153 mm, with external bearings(110 gms), and 25,39,53 Q rings!

What is the weight of a CF double, with external bearings, and a single CF with bearings?
 

Charles.Plager

Recumbent Quant
I will be staying with my Triples, so the max difference between changes is only 12% , Not 17% to 21%!!!!!

There are two things that triples get for you: More range and the ability to have much closer differences.

I'm a really big fan of the range (and you can get some of that with these monster cassettes). But you really need to make sure you clear these decisions with your knees because these monster cassettes have big jumps. :)
 

super slim

Zen MBB Master
There are two things that triples get for you: More range and the ability to have much closer differences.

I'm a really big fan of the range (and you can get some of that with these monster cassettes). But you really need to make sure you clear these decisions with your knees because these monster cassettes have big jumps. :)
655% range with a 53/39/25 q ring crank, and 10 speed 11 to 34 cassette, so 19.3" gear inches (effective wheel size if direct drive) to 126" for 76 kph (48 mph) at 120 cadence when motoring Downhill!
AND 5 gears between 20 kph(12.5 mph) and 30 kph(18.5 mph) at 92 cadence, with a max 12% step between gears!
 

benphyr

Guru-me-not
Also of consideration other that absolute mass is rotational mass. When accelerating, and braking for that matter, this becomes important. When you shift mass from the chainrings to the cassette you lighten up the front boom - that is good. You also decrease the rotational mass at the chainrings - also good. However, you place some of that mass in the cassette which in the case of a 42-11 or 50-10 are just as large as the chainring you are replacing it with so same rotational mass - BUT greater rotational momentum changes required because the cassette is typically spinning faster than the chainring once you get past 1:1 ratios (all but lowest gears for steepest hills).

Someone correct me if I am wrong on any points above, I didn't check my thoughts against real world gearing.

And Cars are going for smaller gaps between gears for greater efficiency, better use of the effective power band. Wouldn't that make even more sense for under-powered motors rather than the other way around? I guess it is convenience (1x) versus efficiency (3x)?
 

rx7mark

Guru
I have a 1x11 on my T50 commuter, and don't find the jump in gears an issue 90-95% of the time. My gearing is a 42 elliptical chaining with a 11-42 Shimano cassette, with 26 inch wheels. On the low end the 42 - 42 is about as low as I can keep stable and have traction. About 6 mph during a climb.

On the upper end the jump between 13 to 11, is the only annoying jump to me, on the flats it's too big, but fine going down a hill. I also feel the need for more high speed gearing, and might either add a Wolf 11-49 conversion with a 48 or 50 chaining or go to a SRAM 10-42 cassette.

But in general the 1x11 is not an issue, but has it own compromises.

Mark
 
Last edited:

jond

Zen MBB Master
I’m loving the nostalgia for the triple based on hard facts.

But we are being sold the latest and greatest pup and for sure 1 x are the bomb.
For your old knees lol.

But gee they look so good. Stick em on gravel grinders and downhill nutter bikes where they make good sense. Or on a T50 commuter bike of course mark.

Out on the open road though you need ratios close and range.

Love my fsa slk triple but she weighs more than her double kforce sister. Must be grams in it for big buck difference. Meanwhile the brand new bloated gossamer pro triple sits unhappily in the slk box. Doomed.

At the end of the day if it mostly works and you’re ridin it then it’s a winner.
 

bladderhead

Zen MBB Master
When I got a Grasshopper with a Rohloff I said I was never going back to Disraeli gears, but Rohloff does not fit my Silvio's forks. Luckily soon after I got the Silvio I discovered XX1, so at least I am saved from those horrible front rings.

All else being equal, it is always nice to get more ratios. 10-42 XX1 cassette only just fits in the Silvio's forks. I had to put a washer on the axle. I think the Eagle cassette is like the XX1 cassette with another cog stuck on the side, which makes it too wide, otherwise I would be tempted. Still, I get up hills at 4mph with 40t ring, and very rarely am I in danger of spinning out.
 

Brad R

Well-Known Member
I would like a narrower step than the 11-13-15, but I have been working on being more comfortable with a wide range of cadences.

It is bothering me less now.
 

RAR

Well-Known Member
I have been riding 10-42 one by for a year now and I ride lots of hills with no problems.
 

Charles.Plager

Recumbent Quant
Also of consideration other that absolute mass is rotational mass. When accelerating, and braking for that matter, this becomes important. When you shift mass from the chainrings to the cassette you lighten up the front boom - that is good. You also decrease the rotational mass at the chainrings - also good. However, you place some of that mass in the cassette which in the case of a 42-11 or 50-10 are just as large as the chainring you are replacing it with so same rotational mass - BUT greater rotational momentum changes required because the cassette is typically spinning faster than the chainring once you get past 1:1 ratios (all but lowest gears for steepest hills).

Someone correct me if I am wrong on any points above, I didn't check my thoughts against real world gearing.

And Cars are going for smaller gaps between gears for greater efficiency, better use of the effective power band. Wouldn't that make even more sense for under-powered motors rather than the other way around? I guess it is convenience (1x) versus efficiency (3x)?

Um, no.

You don't need to worry about the rotational mass of cranksets. They don't spin nearly as fast as the wheels do, and neither cranksets or cassettes have the radius or mass to compare to that of a wheel.
 

jond

Zen MBB Master
I have 34,38,42 chain rings and I mount which ever one fits the course I'm on. My crank arms are 150mm long and here are some of the routes I've done.
https://ridewithgps.com/routes/16076063
https://ridewithgps.com/routes/16169814
https://ridewithgps.com/routes/19762642

Also I'm 5' 9" 150 lbs. 64 years old and I smoked cigarettes for 40 years, though I quit 15 years ago.

That’s plenty of climbing there. Well done on those audax rides. Great decision to dump the fags 15 years ago.

I bet sometimes though when you change out a chainring you think “ be nice if it was already there” in the form of a 2 x Lol.

But it works and you’re riding it so it’s a big winner.
 

Kenneth

Well-Known Member
655% range with a 53/39/25 q ring crank, and 10 speed 11 to 34 cassette, so 19.3" gear inches (effective wheel size if direct drive) to 126" for 76 kph (48 mph) at 120 cadence when motoring Downhill!
AND 5 gears between 20 kph(12.5 mph) and 30 kph(18.5 mph) at 92 cadence, with a max 12% step between gears!
That's quite the spread on the front rings. What FD let's you do that? Right now I have a 50/38/30 but would like maybe to go smaller with the granny.
 
Top