For me the analysis goes thus:
1. 1x systems have too small a range.  Therefore a front derailleur is necessary.
2. Once you have a front derailleur you might as well have three rings to have a good range while avoiding huge steps.
3. if you have a 2:1 ratio big/small at the front, a 3:1 ratio at the rear is enought to give a 6 ratio overall.  11:34 does that without an extreme derailleur.
4. As per another post you use the big and small chainrings only with the  3 extreme cogs, so keeping chainline straightish.
5. 9 speeds at the rear is a good number.  9 speed gear is easy to find.
3x9 triples are the sweet spot for me.  Inexpensive with easy to get parts, and easy to use.  So good it is very hard to improve upon.

Russ, this is why I love your channel. Well thought out practical solutions without trying to be NASA. Real world stuff, tried and tested with your own investment and your own legs. Thank You!

Being somebody who is only recently getting into cycling as an adult,  this sort of wide low double chainring setup is exactly what I've conceptually thought about and want to setup.


Basically, just use as a 1x, with an extra super low climbing chainring.


Thanks for pushing the more reasonable side of cycling friend :)

i have a 22/36 crank and i'm loving it.

I have been running this setup for years, I had 40/25 and 36T cassette on my gravel bike - for two reasons I am old and I have big hills on my neighborhood fitness loop. Now I am even older and run 40/22 and 50T cassette on a full suspension recumbent trike. I need the extra gears because the trike weighs 50lbs - but rides like a Cadillac. Getting it to shift correctly was actual rocket science.😁

One day, about 30-40 years from now for most of you watching this channel, you will begin to realize why this is such a good idea. I’m 75 and it really doesn’t matter much here at my home in Florida, but when I travel to hilly states, I would appreciate some lower gear choices in a 2x. I could go to a 3x but a 2x geared for my ability would simplify things and save a few ounces.

its funny, I was watching this and thinking, "huh, 40/22 sounds familiar".  my mountain bike is set up 2x10 with 40/22 and 11-36 with standard deore xt components from about 2012.  I bet if you found a more mountain-specific front derailleur from the period it would shift just as awesome as mine does.

I ran a "mountain double" crankset (38/22) on my trail/all-mountain bike, and it worked great on almost every kind of terrain I encountered. The big ring was large enough to reach high speeds on flat ground or pedal comfortably on mild descents, and the small ring (combined with an 11-36 cassette) offered some very easy gears for climbing up steep gradients. This setup was kind of the extreme low end of wide-low gearing, but it was perfect for the type of riding I did at the time.

I'm in love with 9 speed system because of it's flexibility. You can combine any 9 speed cogs of any type of cassettes. You can have nice Shimano Sora drop bar shifters, nice steps and variation and still have triple chainrings. Also there is possibility to make some 14-52t cassette if you want lower gearing without sacrificing efficiency with some 9, 10 or 11t cogs. If you travel somewhere in remote area, you can slap any 9 speed rear derailleur and it will work (except very old dura-ace) also if you bend that thing that holds cable bolt of 6,7,8 or 10 speed derailleur, you can alter cable pull enough to get to next good bikeshop with having anywhere from 7 to 9 working gears.

“Adventure crank” used to be how riders would finish grand tours.

Ive been using a 1x for two year and just recently switched to a 3x7 bike. And i honestly love it. I use all three chainrings way more than i thought i would. I think the key is really good shifting to be able to dance between all the gears.

Setup a 3x crank 104 bcd to a 2x 44t 28t with 9 speed 11-40 cassette... cheaper chainrings, casette, crank, brifters, rds, chain, better durability due to better chainline, note that most of those i mentioned are wear and tear parts meant to be replaced after certain amount of use, so upkeep is low... i was able to tune the 3x fd to shift between the 2x chainrings... all in all, this is the most practical approach... thanks Russ for sharing this to more people...

Fully agree. 2 x is the sweet spot for me, too. Personally I prefer the compact crankset layout 50/34 or 48/32, but the idea is the same and to my knowledge it never was out. Shimano's GRX offers just that. Or you just repurpose an old 5-arm 110mm BCD MTB crankset - there is all kind of rings available for this format.

5:05 Mattering on where you are riding, there are some people that should run this with narrow wide chainrings. Both of them. For those that spend their entire ride going up a hill, and then down a hill to the finish, ditching the front derailleur is probably a good idea. Sure, those who are dealing with rolling terrain might want the convenience of a front derailleur. Still for some of us, the advantage of having two front chain rings is worth it and at the same time the front derailleur isn't worth the effort of setting it up or the added weight. Stopping once or twice a ride to physically grab the chain and move it from one ring to another isn't a burden.

Really was not expecting to see an IXF crankset on this channel. I've been running these for years and it's insanely good value.

I run a triple but I think it's helped by the fact it's also on our tandem, so I'm just always in the mindset of using a triple when switching between the two.  Can live in the big ring for rolling tarmac, dropping in and out of middle for climbs, and just stay in middle for gravel or hillier roads, and then have the granny for horrible climbs / tired legs.  I know it's an antiquated way of thinking these days, but i like having a cheapo 9 speed cassette on the back with smallish range and small jumps, with the front providing the range.

I discovered a Shimano ultra-low triple, 40x30x22. Basically the same as your wide-low except with a middle ring to bridge the gap. And it will work with my regular 10-speed cassette, resulting in 98.8-16.6 range in gear inches. Wish me luck!

I've been messing around with old 90s MTBs for a few years now and stumbled into a nearly identical wide-low setup after some tinkering. I own a number of bikes for various purposes and this is, by far, my favourite drivetrain. It climbs like a goat and keeps up with in-town group rides with no fuss. I've restored and flipped a few bikes since then to spread the word and help people see how amazing an old bike could be simply by dropping a chainring 🎉

I have different views on the purpose behind the triple. For me it not only optimizes gearing range, but also (when used accordingly) optimizes chainline. If you only use the big front ring with the three smallest rear cogs, only use the small front ring with the three largest rear cogs, you avoid both overlap and save most riding for the middle chainring and middle cogs. Keep the chain parallel to the frame for longer life and fewer mis-shifts.

The mountain bike that we here in the Philippines could afford, a month's salary, is the 3x7. We are used to change the chainwheel every 2 or 3 gear changes in the freewheel. The oldies taught us that. So it is not necessarily a 21 speed but still a 7 speed, especially for the people who wishes to make their chains last the longest. The most affordable chains here is the DID worth $4.