# Double singlespeed?



## ColinJ (14 Apr 2022)

I am thinking of converting my singlespeed bike to a double singlespeed (2 chainrings and 2 sprockets)***.

1 ring and 1 sprocket would be what I use now - 52/19. I have done thousands of kms in that ratio and it is great for flat rides, or undulating ones with no really steep climbs and only short ramps of around 10%.

The thing is, we have a lot of steep climbs around here. For the steepest ones I would always use my best bike, which has a triple chainset giving a very handy 28/30 bottom gear.

There are other routes which are too hard for my 52/19 ratio, but not so steep that I need the triple. Here are 3 example profiles...
















If I set the singlespeed up with a 42 ring and a 29 sprocket then the total number of teeth would be the same as before, so maybe I could get away with using the same length chain? I could use the chain tensioner to take up a small amount of extra slack in the chain if need be.

Those intermediate routes are not particularly challenging on the triple but could be a _REAL _challenge (for me) but still rideable in a 42/29 gear. That's something I would like to try.

I have the 42 ring and some 29 sprockets so it won't take much work to give this a go, but perhaps I will try riding around on my best bike in the nearest equivalent ratio and see how I get on.

The plan would be to select the gear at home before setting out on the ride; no gear changing out on the road. I reckon I could move the chain and adjust the tensioner in a couple of minutes, including degreasing my hands afterwards!

The 52/19 gear suits me best at 20-30 kph, so the 42/29 would only be good for (say) 11-17 kph. That is too slow for riding far on the flat, but the routes I have in mind involve either a very short warm-up on the flat, or a long drag up a 2% gradient, so speed would not be an issue early in the ride. Those routes top out and then largely end downhill; I could just freewheel on the descents. I checked on some of the gentler descents today - I was spinning out in 52/19 anyway so a low ratio would make little difference on them either way.

Have any of you ever done anything like this? 


*** If this idea is a success, I might eventually go for a second bike option - singlespeed bike #1 permanently 52/19; singlespeed bike #2 permanently 42 (or 39)/29 (or 30). The first bike was largely built from spare parts. I'd do the same for a second bike. It's not something I'd want to spend hundreds of pounds on.


----------



## Venod (14 Apr 2022)

I have run one of these before, I think Sram do one also.

https://road.cc/content/review/33373-sturmey-archer-s2-kickshift-hub


----------



## Threevok (14 Apr 2022)

I think it's called a Dinglespeed


----------



## ColinJ (14 Apr 2022)

Venod said:


> I have run one of these before, I think Sram do one also.
> 
> https://road.cc/content/review/33373-sturmey-archer-s2-kickshift-hub


That's an interesting device. I think a 53" climbing gear would still be too tough for me though! My 42/29 would be more like 38".



Threevok said:


> I think it's called a Dinglespeed


Oh, thanks. I just Googled that and found lots of stuff to look at later!


----------



## Threevok (14 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> That's an interesting device. I think a 53" climbing gear would still be too tough for me though! My 42/29 would be more like 38".
> 
> 
> Oh, thanks. I just Googled that and found lots of stuff to look at later!



I had a into look into it myself, when I first built the single speed. I also considered a 3x1 setup, but that would have required a tensioner.

I think if I did consider gears, I would probably go the same way a mate of mine did, and put a three speed SA hub on the rear


----------



## Ming the Merciless (14 Apr 2022)

How about a flippable rear wheel with sprockets with different teeth numbers both sides? An option often deployed by fixed riders.


----------



## Threevok (14 Apr 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> How about a flippable rear wheel with sprockets with different teeth numbers both sides? An option often deployed by fixed riders.



Ah yes, the flip-flop hub. Although I think that makes them a Fixie one way around, plus no disc brake as a result (if you care)


----------



## Ian H (14 Apr 2022)

Ming the Merciless said:


> How about a flippable rear wheel with sprockets with different teeth numbers both sides? An option often deployed by fixed riders.


I use that, but it does limit you to a couple of teeth difference depending on the length of your dropouts.

A really low gear would be better singlespeed than fixed.


----------



## GuyBoden (14 Apr 2022)

I have different sets of front chainrings and rear sprockets for my track bike.

If each set of chainring and sprocket's tooth count are the same, or one difference, they usually work fine with the same chain.

Track bike riders have been doing this for as long as they have been racing. Different chainrings or Sprockets or chain lengths for different venues/events.


----------



## ColinJ (14 Apr 2022)

I already have the spare chainring on the bike and can replace one of the spacers on the back with the 29 tooth sprocket so it it will be a quick (and free!) conversion.

I might give it a try tomorrow.


----------



## Chris S (14 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> I am thinking of converting my singlespeed bike to a double singlespeed (2 chainrings and 2 sprockets)***.
> 
> 1 ring and 1 sprocket would be what I use now - 52/19. I have done thousands of kms in that ratio and it is great for flat rides, or undulating ones with no really steep climbs and only short ramps of around 10%.
> 
> ...


I had exactly the same idea!


----------



## ColinJ (14 Apr 2022)

I am going to try doing one of those hilly loops on my best bike with the gear kept at 28/19, which is near enough equivalent to 42/29. If I like it, I will go ahead with the dinglespeed project.

I doubt that I will be able to use 28/17 but if I can, that would be equivalent to my next higher option - 42/26. Forget that - different chain lengths!



Chris S said:


> I had exactly the same idea!


A 'dinglespeed' or 2 singlespeeds?


----------



## Sharky (15 Apr 2022)

I ran with a standard double on the front (42/52) and a double fixed track hub. One side a small (14)cog and the other something like an 18.
Used the small/big to give a comfortable gear for riding out to events before flipping to a big/small to give a time trial gear of about 88".
Had horizontal track ends, so easy to take up any chain slack.


----------



## ColinJ (15 Apr 2022)

Sharky said:


> I ran with a standard double on the front (42/52) and a double fixed track hub. One side a small (14)cog and the other something like an 18.
> Used the small/big to give a comfortable gear for riding out to events before flipping to a big/small to give a time trial gear of about 88".
> Had horizontal track ends, so easy to take up any chain slack.


I have been thinking about it... I probably would do the A646 from Todmorden to Cliviger in the higher gear. It gains 100 m in 5 km so that is an average gradient of only 2% and then the road goes downhill at 2% for another 2.5 km. It would be a right pain crawling along that in the lower gear for 7.5 km!

I will make sure that I carry a piece of rag or a rubber glove to keep my hands clean when shifting the chain.


----------



## Once a Wheeler (15 Apr 2022)

Double single-speed was standard practice in the mid-1930s. Rear wheels were threaded for a fixed sprocket on both sides of the hub so that competitors in the Tour de France, for example, could stop at the foot of a mountain, undo the wheel with the new-fangled wing-nuts, turn it round and engage the larger sprocket for the climb. The procedure was repeated at the summit of the col to engage the smaller sprocket again. Rear ends were long enough to take up the differences in axle position with no need for any tensioning devices.




Wing nuts and two sprockets clearly visible on the bike on the left. I have heard that the leading riders of the day knew that less experienced riders would take their cue from the champions to choose the right moment to change gear. As a result _les grands_ would sometimes stop on a small rise well before a climb, turn their rear wheel through 360° and break away easily as the bunch, twiddling madly on a small gear, found it impossible to keep up.
No reason why you should not adopt the same system today:




Just build the wheel and add wing nuts or a QR axle.


----------



## MontyVeda (15 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> ... I could just freewheel on the descents.
> ...
> Have any of you ever done anything like this?
> ...


All the time!


----------



## Chris S (15 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> I am going to try doing one of those hilly loops on my best bike with the gear kept at 28/19, which is near enough equivalent to 42/29. If I like it, I will go ahead with the dinglespeed project.
> 
> I doubt that I will be able to use 28/17 but if I can, that would be equivalent to my next higher option - 42/26. Forget that - different chain lengths!
> 
> ...


Two chainrings and two sprockets, each pair with the same total number of teeth.


----------



## ColinJ (15 Apr 2022)

The bike is off the road for a short time until new brake inners and outers arrive, so I might as well do the dingle conversion now. I found a 29 tooth sprocket in my junk box with very little wear on it. That will do nicely.

I realised that I will need to use an Allen key to adjust the chain tensioner** when swapping between the 2 ratios, so I might as well use that as a hook to lift the chain and thereby keep my hands clean. (** The jockey wheel on the tensioner is on a rod which can be slid in or out to line up with the chain.)

I'll report back once I have converted the bike and done a test ride.


----------



## ColinJ (16 Apr 2022)

Hmm... I tried it but was surprised by how much slack there is in the chain in the 42/29. It is a lot more slack than I'd want to take up with the chain tensioner. It might work with a 43 or 44 tooth ring but I am not going to buy an expensive new Campagnolo chainring to find out.

If the bike had horizontal dropouts I would be able to take up the slack without using a tensioner. Maybe one day I will buy a suitable new frame and do it properly!

In the mean time... To simulate overgeared dinglespeed climbing, I will try to do those climbs without changing from the 36/24 gear on my best bike. That is around a 40" gear. (And I can use a sensible gear for the other parts of the rides.)


----------



## GuyBoden (16 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> Hmm... I tried it but was surprised by how much slack there is in the chain in the 42/29. It is a lot more slack than I'd want to take up with the chain tensioner. It might work with a 43 or 44 tooth ring but I am not going to buy an expensive new Campagnolo chainring to find out.
> 
> If the bike had horizontal dropouts I would be able to take up the slack without using a tensioner. Maybe one day I will buy a suitable new frame and do it properly!
> 
> In the mean time... To simulate overgeared dinglespeed climbing, I will try to do those climbs without changing from the 36/24 gear on my best bike. That is around a 40" gear. (And I can use a sensible gear for the other parts of the rides.)



Using multiple sets of chainrings/sprockets with the same chain length, but with the same tooth count or one tooth difference does work.

Edit:
You currently have 52+19=71
You want to use 42+29=71

I'm surprised it doesn't work, but I have a proper track bike with rear track ends.


----------



## ColinJ (16 Apr 2022)

GuyBoden said:


> Using multiple sets of chainrings/sprockets with the same chain length, but with the same tooth count or one tooth difference does work.


_IF _you have horizontal dropouts... 

I have literally just tried it with the same tooth count (52+19 vs 42+29) and have now got a slack chain.

PS Ah, you have posted the same thing while I was typing! 



GuyBoden said:


> I'm surprised it doesn't work


I had another look. The chain does have quite a lot of slack and I don't like how much chain deflection the tensioner is having to impose, but it does actually _just_ work.

These pictures show the extra slack on the 29...



















I haven't quite got a perfect chainline. I put 2 spacers between the sprockets thinking that would match the gap between the rings, but it is obvious looking along the chain that 1 spacer would have been better. I've come this far - I might as well move the sprocket to improve the chainline and ride the bike to see how well it works. It might be okay out on the road rather than upside down in my kitchen!

Yes, there _IS _a 3rd sprocket but it is only there for the lockring to tighten against. I did a few rides with the lockring tightened against the end spacer but it kept coming loose.


----------



## ColinJ (17 Apr 2022)

When I turned the bike the right way up, I could see that the chainline on the 42/29 was as good as it was going to get without resorting to half thickness spacers. Using two was about half a spacer off perfect one way, one would have been half a spacer off the the other way. Suffice to say, it was fine.

I did a 20 km test ride. The first half was done with my original 52/19 gear, then I stopped to switch to 42/29. It only took me about 90 seconds to do it. Then I set off up a hill that defeated me in 52/19...

Oh wow, this was good. This was VERY good! Despite the slack taken up by the tensioner, the chain ran really smoothly. I have a newish ring, a newish sprocket, and a newish chain and it was so quiet in operation that I couldn't hear it. The gear felt ideal for what I was doing. Hills that I was climbing at 10 - 15 kph felt good but I could have managed those in the bigger gear anyway. Steeper 7 - 10 kph climbs were much better in 42/29. A couple of steep ones that I climbed at 4 - 7 kph would have been way too hard for me in 52/19 but were merely nicely challenging in 42/29.

I am very pleasantly surprised at how well this arrangement works! I will definitely plan more rides which can be done ~50% in one gear and ~50% the other. (I don't want to mess about dismounting and manhandling the chain multiple times per ride.)

There was one catch though...I had to mess with the chain tensioner to get it to reach far enough for the new chain position. Something about that change has stopped the retaining bolt tightening enough so the tensioner slowly slipped down in the second half of the ride. I got within a few hundred metres of home and then the chain peeled off! Probably putting a washer under the bolt head will do the trick? I'll sort it out before my next ride.

The bike is now officially a _dinglespeed_!




PS Things may not work quite so well once the chain starts to wear. At that point I might have to consider shortening the chain by using a half-link to replace one pair of links.


----------



## GuyBoden (18 Apr 2022)

Well done, that's a very creative solution.

I'm presuming that you are using standard Shimano type sprockets removed from a cassette, with a standard hyperglide hub.

If so, as you already probably know, a 30T sprocket would probably work too.

Maybe, someone has a spare used 30T cassette, so you can remove the 30T sprocket by drilling the rivets.


----------



## ColinJ (18 Apr 2022)

GuyBoden said:


> Well done, that's a very creative solution.
> 
> I'm presuming that you are using standard Shimano type sprockets removed from a cassette, with a standard hyperglide hub.
> 
> ...



No, it is Campagnolo, but I now use 12-30 cassettes rather than the 13-29 that I used to use!

I can't remember if I have moved to a second cassette since I made the change. If I _HAVE_ then I probably have the old 30 in a bag somewhere. If I have _NOT_, maybe it is time to put one of my new cassettes on the best bike and pinch the 30 off the old cassette? It would certainly help with the chain slack, and would give me another 3.3% off the climbing gear.


----------



## Venod (18 Apr 2022)

What you need now is a derailleur to replace the chain tensioner, and while your at it a front derailleur and a couple of down tube shifters, would be a good idea.


----------



## ColinJ (18 Apr 2022)

Venod said:


> What you need now is a derailleur to replace the chain tensioner, and while your at it a front derailleur and a couple of down tube shifters, would be a good idea.



Ha ha. 

I have bikes with lots of gears, as you know since you and your lad sold me one! (Ok, that one was minus a front derailleur but it has a nice 11-42 cassette to compensate.)

The thing is, when lower gears are available it is really hard to resist the temptation to change down. The hills I am thinking about for the 'dinglespeed' are no challenge in a really low gear. In 42/29 (or maybe 42/30) they need much more effort, which makes those rides more interesting. Since I don't have a lower gear, I will just have to make the effort in the gear I'm in. Just like people did years ago, though they wouldn't even have had a gear as low as 42/29. I bet many people were riding 42/21 or 42/23 bottom gear 40 years ago?

Instead of being in the ideal gear all the time, on the dinglespeed I will be about 1/3 under-geared, I/3 well-geared, and 1/3 over-geared.

This would not have made any sense to me before I got to like the singlespeed bike. It was only intended to be a knockabout bike to nip up and down the valley roads on, but I started doing longer rides and really enjoyed them. Then I started doing a few moderate hills, and they were good too. It was the longer/steeper hills that stopped me doing more on the bike.

I will still have my other bikes for rides with lots of 15-25% ascending.


----------



## ColinJ (18 Apr 2022)

Obviously, if I were bothered about speed, this would be a very bad idea! 1/3 of the time I will be freewheeling, and on steeper climbs I will grovelling rather than spinning an ideal gear.

I like the idea of easy effort, moderate, hard, moderate, easy, moderate, hard, easy... A version of Fartlek on the bike?


----------



## Venod (18 Apr 2022)

You can still just use the 2 gears with derailleurs, just stops the messing about changing by hand.


----------



## ColinJ (18 Apr 2022)

Venod said:


> You can still just use the 2 gears with derailleurs, just stops the messing about changing by hand.



Use the rear mech as a chain tensioner... Select the sprocket of choice and hold the chain there by adjusting the endstops to prevent rear gear changes!


----------



## keithmac (18 Apr 2022)

You cold have 8 gears with an Alfine hub 👍


----------



## ColinJ (18 Apr 2022)

keithmac said:


> You cold have 8 gears with an Alfine hub 👍



You are not paying attention... I _already _had one bike with 30 gears, another with 27 gears, one with 20 gears, one with 11 gears and one singlespeed bike. I simply wanted to make the singlespeed bike more usable in the hills while keeping it simple. I don't need _yet another_ bike with lots of gears! 

Having said that, I would like to own a bike with a 14-speed Rohloff hub, especially one with belt drive...


----------



## GuyBoden (19 Apr 2022)

I've just checked my two setups for my track bike:

46 + 16 = 62, this combination is for the training rollers in the garage, mainly for winter or when it's raining. Gear is 2.9

40 + 21 = 61, this combination is for pootling around Cheshire with my wife in the summer on sunny days. Gear is 1.9

I can swap between the two combinations without removing the chain, but I have to swap the chainring and sprocket.

It's not "Dingle speed", so not as convenient as your creative setup.

Edit: I calculate your "Dingle speed" gear as 1.4


----------



## ColinJ (19 Apr 2022)

I watched an interesting video last night where someone made his own half-link to make his chain the perfect length for a singlespeed bike with vertical dropouts and no chain tensioner. 

It wouldn't help me as much because I need 2 different chain lengths depending which gear I am using. I could use less tensioning in the lower gear and virtually none in the higher gear though. 

It was a clever idea but I am not sure that I would trust a DIY half-link. I think I will buy some instead!


----------



## dave r (19 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> I
> 
> It was a clever idea but I am not sure that I would trust a DIY half-link. I think I will buy some instead!



If I need a male/female half link for my fixed I usually buy them from Velo Solo.

https://www.velosolo.co.uk/kmcm2f.html


----------



## GuyBoden (19 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> I watched an interesting video last night where someone made his own half-link to make his chain the perfect length for a singlespeed bike with vertical dropouts and no chain tensioner.
> 
> It wouldn't help me as much because I need 2 different chain lengths depending which gear I am using. I could use less tensioning in the lower gear and virtually none in the higher gear though.
> 
> It was a clever idea but I am not sure that I would trust a DIY half-link. I think I will buy some instead!


I'd put the 30T sprocket on, yes, that new one in the box, sitting there, doing nothing.


----------



## ColinJ (19 Apr 2022)

GuyBoden said:


> I'd put the 30T sprocket on, yes, that new one in the box, sitting there, doing nothing.



Have you seen the price of Campagnolo 10-speed 12-30 cassettes!

I probably _will_ put a 30 on but if I do it will be a used one. If I have one lying about it will be that one, otherwise I will take the 30 off the used cassette on the best bike and put a new cassette on.


----------



## Juan Kog (19 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> It was a clever idea but I am not sure that I would trust a DIY half-link. I think I will buy some instead!





dave r said:


> If I need a male/female half link for my fixed I usually buy them from Velo Solo.
> 
> https://www.velosolo.co.uk/kmcm2f.html


Very wise young Colin , follow Uncle Dave’s advise. After all you don’t want to save money on a half link then have to spend £10,000 on reconstructive dentistry.


----------



## Dogtrousers (19 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> The thing is, when lower gears are available it is really hard to resist the temptation to change down. The hills I am thinking about for the 'dinglespeed' are no challenge in a really low gear.



Now we are getting to the truth. Forget all this stuff about simplicity - the real reason for riding a SS is masochism.


----------



## keithmac (19 Apr 2022)

ColinJ said:


> You are not paying attention... I _already _had one bike with 30 gears, another with 27 gears, one with 20 gears, one with 11 gears and one singlespeed bike. I simply wanted to make the singlespeed bike more usable in the hills while keeping it simple. I don't need _yet another_ bike with lots of gears!
> 
> Having said that, I would like to own a bike with a 14-speed Rohloff hub, especially one with belt drive...



I saw a lovely belt drive with Shimano hubbed bike a while back but no room for it unfortunately!.

I have two bikes with Gates Carbon Drive and it really is a good system imho.


----------



## ColinJ (19 Apr 2022)

Dogtrousers said:


> Now we are getting to the truth. Forget all this stuff about simplicity - the real reason for riding a SS is masochism.



TBH I used to think the same as you. I had spoken to many riders who are avid fans of fixed. It always seemed a bit odd to me, but when I started riding a simple singlespeed bike built mainly from spare parts I started to get it. I don't contemplate switching to fixed round here, but I do like the singlespeed and double singlespeed is kind of the same thing with a compromise to get me up onto the hilltops. 

I have just moved the big sprocket over one spacer. As I mentioned above, it does not improve the chainline, but it will prevent the chain getting stuck between the 2 sprockets when I do my manual gear changes. 

I am nipping over to Hebden Bridge on the bike soon. I will go along the flattish valley road in the 52/19 gear, but if it stays dry I might change gear for the return journey and ride up through Colden and Blackshaw Head to the Long Causeway before dropping back to the valley. I am well used to that loop on my triple chainset best bike. It will be interesting to see how riding the 2 x 1 compares to it.


----------



## Sharky (19 Apr 2022)

On my Bowery 72, which has true horizontal track ends, I can use an 18t tooth giving a 68" gear upto a 13t giving about a 90+" gear. All using the same chain length and chainring.


----------



## GuyBoden (19 Apr 2022)

Sharky said:


> On my Bowery 72, which has true horizontal track ends, I can use an 18t tooth giving a 68" gear upto a 13t giving about a 90+" gear. All using the same chain length and chainring.



Yes, as I stated earlier, having a range of sprockets is standard practice for track cyclists.


----------



## ColinJ (19 Apr 2022)

I am back. I had a good spin both ways along the valley road. I had forgotten that a family Zoom meeting was scheduled for 17:00 so I rushed back. I am sitting here at 17:20 and no sign of the others - typical! 

If I had taken the slow, scenic route no doubt the meeting would have started on time and I would be told off for being late!


----------



## ColinJ (19 Apr 2022)

Aha.. They have arrived!


----------



## Threevok (19 Apr 2022)

I must say, I do enjoy commuting single-speed more than the 3x10, plus I think it definately makes you a better (if not more efficient) rider


----------



## ColinJ (19 Apr 2022)

I am definitely getting old... The Zoom meeting started but nobody could see me. I spent 5 minutes messing about with video settings before I remembered my anti-hacker privacy protection - a sticking plaster over the lens of the webcam!


----------



## ColinJ (29 Apr 2022)

First things first. I find the word '_dinglespeed_' a bit twee so from now on the bike will be known as a '_two-speed_', but I'll save some typing by shortening that to '_2-speed_'! I will never do an entire ride in the 42/29 unless someone transports me to the foot of a long 10+% climb which I then ride up and freewheel back down. If I do an entire ride in the 52/19, that is a singlespeed ride. If I use both gears, that is a 2-speed ride. Clever, huh?

Now then - important news. I put the ColinJ engineering team to work and they have come up with an impressive new shifting technology, optimised for 2-speed bikes. They found the materials for the prototype in the works canteen, but rest assured - when we go into production we will set up a truly professional manufacturing plant. 2-speed test rides were very successful, so the next step was to decide on a catchy name for this new technology.

I have ridden with _Campagnolo Ergopower_ shifters on some of my bikes for over 2 decades. Our new shifters are a bit less 'ergo' and a lot less powerful, so we did think about calling them _Ergopowerless_, but a survey showed that the workforce were not happy with that name.

The next suggestion was inspired by _Shimano STI_ ('_Shimano Total Integration_'). My reasoning was that if Shimano can get away with naming their kit after sexually transmitted infections, we would get away with calling ours _UTI _(_Useful Tool, Innit_?). That name was dismissed when someone pointed out that, unlike our shifters, a _UTI _is something that you definitely do _NOT _want!

Then our M.D. had a brainwave. _SRAM _make '_Double Tap_' shifters. Our superior technology will henceforth be known as...



_*












Single Hook! *_


----------



## classic33 (30 Apr 2022)

Dingle-Speed, post nine.
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vintage/708498-two-speed-freewheel.html


----------



## ColinJ (30 Apr 2022)

I see post #9...



Post #9 said:


> this wouldn't be a winter singlespeed; it'd be some sort of homegrown dingle-speed. between the headache of setting this up, manually changing gears for "monster hills", and still having to clean/maintain everything else on the bike, i think you'd be better off with a cheap 1x5 set-up. Or, pick a gear you can live with, and run singlespeed.



... and raise you with post #11!



Post #11 said:


> As far as changing gears goes, my situation is that I can handle most of the riding I do in high gear. I would need to switch for one hill I ride over often that climbs just under a thousand feet in the course of two miles, with some very steep sections. I'd also change at the end of every ride to come up the 3/4 mile steep dirt road that leads to my house--a climb that I always have to make when I'm at my most tired. It's not as if I'd be getting off the bike and changing gears at every little rise in the road.


I don't need a 1x5 - I already have a 3x10!

As for picking a gear I can live with and running singlespeed... I _did_, and have done thousands of kms in that 52/19 gear. Unfortunately, none of those kms were at gradients greater than 12-13% and most of them were nowhere near 10%. I can take my singlespeed to the Vale of York or Cheshire and it is fine. Round here it is pretty much good only for the valley roads and the Cragg Vale climb, that's it. With the addition of one more gear I should now be able to ride about 95% of my usual routes.


----------



## GuyBoden (1 May 2022)

ColinJ said:


> First things first. I find the word '_dinglespeed_' a bit twee so from now on the bike will be known as a '_two-speed_', but I'll save some typing by shortening that to '_2-speed_'! I will never do an entire ride in the 42/29 unless someone transports me to the foot of a long 10+% climb which I then ride up and freewheel back down. If I do an entire ride in the 52/19, that is a singlespeed ride. If I use both gears, that is a 2-speed ride. Clever, huh?
> 
> Now then - important news. I put the ColinJ engineering team to work and they have come up with an impressive new shifting technology, optimised for 2-speed bikes. They found the materials for the prototype in the works canteen, but rest assured - when we go into production we will set up a truly professional manufacturing plant. 2-speed test rides were very successful, so the next step was to decide on a catchy name for this new technology.
> 
> ...



Looks like you're using a "Spoon fed" system.


----------



## ColinJ (29 Dec 2022)

Before anybody suggests that I am completely mad for messing about like this when I already own good bikes with lots of gears... 

I enjoy playing about with the bike, making cheap but effective changes to it.
There would be no point in spending lots of money on the bike since it would then compete with my multi-geared bikes.
If I tart the bike up too much then I will no longer feel relaxed leaving it locked up out of my sight in public places.
I ride the bike differently to my other bikes. Most of the time I am either slightly under-geared (which gives my legs a good spin) or very over-geared (which makes my short local shopping rides much more intense than they would otherwise be).
If you _still _think this is stupid... the rest of the forum is over there ---->! 

Anyway - the state of play:



Threevok said:


> I had a into look into it myself, when I first built the single speed. I also considered a 3x1 setup, but that would have required a tensioner.





ColinJ said:


> Yes, there _IS _a 3rd sprocket but it is only there for the lockring to tighten against. I did a few rides with the lockring tightened against the end spacer but it kept coming loose.





Venod said:


> What you need now is a derailleur to replace the chain tensioner, and while your at it a front derailleur and a couple of down tube shifters, would be a good idea.





Venod said:


> You can still just use the 2 gears with derailleurs, just stops the messing about changing by hand.


I have had a lot of experience with the bike since I made the original gearing changes...

I still do the vast majority of my rides in the 52/19 gear, but the 42/29 ratio has enabled me to do quite a few rides with lumpy mid sections. _Which is nice..._

I tried staying in the 42/29 between lumpy sections but the constant spinning out was annoying me so I had to stop more often than I had planned to and change back to 52/19 by hand. (Why hasn't somebody invented a mechanism to do this for us? )

Okay, yes - chain shifting by hand _IS _a right faff, so another version is being planned...

The plan was for a 1x2 using an old rear mech and a down tube friction shifter. I was going to use 42/15 and 42/29 gears. The stiffer gear is about 2% higher then the current 52/19, so that would be fine, and I would still have my easier climbing gear. Then I thought about it... I have a small serrated sprocket on the freehub which is currently only there to tighten the lockring against (having had the ring come loose on rides without that extra sprocket). I might as well use that too, and make the bike into a 1x3!

The little sprocket will be a 12. That will give me an optional much higher top gear of 42/12, good for 40 kph (25 mph) at my preferred maximum cadence of 90 rpm vs the 31 kph (19.5 mph) of my current 52/19. I will have my 42/29 gear for steep climbs. I will have a good gear for general riding - the 42/15 - and I will give that one a perfect chainline. The other gears will not be far off perfect chainlines either, since the 29 and 12 will only be 1 spacer away either side of the 15.

There is just one problem... The frame does not have friction shifter bosses on the down tube, and that tube is very oversized so the clamp-on bosses that I have seen will not fit. I might be able to attach a clamp-on boss somewhere else, such as the seat tube? Or perhaps make my own. I don't want to put an Ergopower brake/shifter on the bar because I really like the dedicated brake levers that I have now.


----------



## mustang1 (29 Dec 2022)

Threevok said:


> I think it's called a Dinglespeed



I thought it's just called a geared bike


----------



## DCLane (29 Dec 2022)

Having read the thread I a) think it's an interesting experiment, part-way between gears and single-speed and b) prefer the term 'Dinglespeed'


----------



## biggs682 (Monday at 07:25)

I keep thinking of doing something similar but have just never got round to doing it yet.


----------



## Dogtrousers (Monday at 08:51)

ColinJ said:


> There is just one problem... The frame does not have friction shifter bosses on the down tube, and that tube is very oversized so the clamp-on bosses that I have seen will not fit. I might be able to attach a clamp-on boss somewhere else, such as the seat tube? Or perhaps make my own. I don't want to put an Ergopower brake/shifter on the bar because I really like the dedicated brake levers that I have now.


Bar end? Stem mounted? May be able to get an old stem-mount one off ebay or somewhere like that. It's going to be relatively infrequently used so doesn't need to be super ergonomic.
https://restoringvintagebicycles.com/2018/12/30/stem-mounted-shifters/


----------



## ColinJ (Monday at 11:36)

Dogtrousers said:


> Bar end? Stem mounted? May be able to get an old stem-mount one off ebay or somewhere like that. It's going to be relatively infrequently used so doesn't need to be super ergonomic.
> https://restoringvintagebicycles.com/2018/12/30/stem-mounted-shifters/



I already have an old Campagnolo friction shifter which I could use if I could find or make a suitable mount for it. 

The bike has a chunky Ahead-style stem which I think would be tricky to mount to. 

I think that I could perhaps find a clamp-on mount to fit the handlebar, just to the right of the stem. I will scour t' web later.


----------



## Venod (Monday at 17:28)

There are loads of down tube brackets for shifters both new and used.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/29418525...624&ssuid=&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY


----------



## ColinJ (Monday at 17:46)

Venod said:


> There are loads of down tube brackets for shifters both new and used.
> 
> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/29418525...624&ssuid=&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY


There certainly _are_, but you missed the problem...



ColinJ said:


> The frame does not have friction shifter bosses on the down tube, and _*that tube is very oversized so the clamp-on bosses that I have seen will not fit*_.


Though maybe one of those would work on the handlebar instead?


----------



## Venod (Monday at 18:52)

ColinJ said:


> There certainly _are_, but you missed the problem...
> 
> 
> Though maybe one of those would work on the handlebar instead?



You're right I did miss that, how big is the tube ?

https://problemsolversbike.com/products/shifters-derailleurs/downtube_shifter_mount_-_31244


----------



## ColinJ (Monday at 18:59)

Venod said:


> You're right I did miss that, how big is the tube ?
> 
> https://problemsolversbike.com/products/shifters-derailleurs/downtube_shifter_mount_-_31244


I spotted those on a previous search.

The downtube is ovalised and 150 mm in circumference, so roughly equivalent to 48 mm diameter if it had been a circular cross-section!


----------

