[theelous3]

I do understand. That's why I recommend the second hand hardtail kona for the same price (or cheaper).

> If it lasts me a year that's good enough

I don't like this attitude because it is wasteful. That's another thing I was taking issue with. Worse because it's an ebike. If it was just some aluminum it wouldn't be nearly as bad, but still kinda bad.

> But what's the big deal about a triple front deraileur?

More moving parts, super unreliable, always low quality.

Modern mtbs use a 1x11 or 1x12 drivetrain (no front derailleur at all, never mind 3x).

[PaulDavisThe1st]

> Modern mtbs use a 1x11 or 1x12 drivetrain (no front derailleur at all, never mind 3x).

... which creates much more chain wear from chain crossing ...

> More moving parts, super unreliable, always low quality.

I have a 35 year old Shimano Deore XT front derailleur. I raced the bike hard in the 80s during "the prehistory of UK mountain bike racing". I then rode it for another 8 years, doing several multi-thousand mile tours on it (before the name "gravel bike" had come along). Then I used it as a city commuter for another 5 years.

The derailleur has never failed me, has always been reliable and is built better than most contemporary equivalents.

The fad for 1x setups illuminates some of the pros, but because it's largely a fad, fails to shine a similar light on the cons. For crazy downhill racing, 1x is an obvious choice. For ultra-distance events, long distance off-road touring and general gravel duty, the choice is not quite so obvious.

[grogenaut]

I set my cyclocross up with a triple front and a touring rear. The cycle shop questioned me on why I did it. I explained that the last mile was also 600 foot climb. The super fit kid working there was like "that hill is easy, I do that on my speed gears". I said "yea but look at me". He said "true". then proceeded to say he couldn't install it because shimano wouldn't recommend it (too many tooth delta). But he'd adjust it if I put it on my self. So I did. Basically it's a road front with a MTB small, and a mtb cassette in the back.

It's got 5k miles on it and works fine. Just needs little tweaks every once and a while and you can't do full crosses like Big Big. But it goes as fast and as torquey as you could please (or can buy).

These things work pretty well. Just learn to tweak em or get them tuned up.

[theelous3]

> The derailleur has never failed me, has always been reliable and is built better than most contemporary equivalents.

Why are you comparing your name brand derailleur from a reputable company (from a time when there was basically only x3) that you say is still better than contemporaries, with the absolute worst of those contemporaries, as a way to somehow imply this particularly bad contemporary is worthwhile?

Wild train of thought.

Interesting how you assert 1x setups as a fad for mountain bikes, and then go on to talk about how it's not a clear choice for... long distance touring? Gravel biking? What are you talking about lol

[PaulDavisThe1st]

> then go on to talk about how it's not a clear choice for... long distance touring

I guess you've not ridden the Great Divide? Long distance mountain bike touring. You could do it on a gravel bike, but it would be much more comfortable on a mountain bike.

Gravel biking ... mountain biking ... the difference is mostly in the eye (or saddle) of the beholder.

[theelous3]

Right, that confirms it. I'm sorry but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

> I guess you've not ridden the Great Divide? Long distance mountain bike touring.

That is the most easy going barely off road biking on earth. Thousands of miles of fire and access roads, with a few miles of zero difficulty single track.

> You could do it on a gravel bike, but it would be much more comfortable on a mountain bike.

"A mountain bike". The overwhelming majority of mountain bikes are unsuitable for this. You wouldn't use any of the most popular types: trail, downhill, enduro.

Gravel biking and mountain biking are world's apart.

The closest thing to gravel biking or other long distance off road biking in mountain biking is cross country - but even then xc is _way_ more demanding than gravel. You can't ride gravel bikes on xc routes. Gravel biking is not a form of mountain biking. There does not need to be any elevation change of any kind to gravel bike. There are no features on a gravel trail.

Anyway, sure, a hard tail xc bike is probably the best bike for that trip just due to the comfort of the larger tires. I bet you'd actually be just as happy with a fatty gravel bike though.

You know, I just went and searched to see what people ride on that trail to confirm my suspicion about big tire gravel bikes. Would you look at that - I'm right. Hard tail xc / gravel bikes with fat tires.

Additionally, the vast majority of them are running 1x front chainrings.

Surprise surprise, I know what I'm talking about, and the people that seriously ride the trail you're trying to use to one up me made the same choices I recommend. What a "fad".

https://bikepacking.com/bikes/tour-divide-rigs-2019/

> Gravel biking ... mountain biking ... the difference is mostly in the eye (or saddle) of the beholder.

Absolutely clueless. The difference is stark.

[CRConrad]

> Why are you comparing your name brand derailleur from a reputable company (from a time when there was basically only x3) that you say is still better than contemporaries, with the absolute worst of those contemporaries, as a way to somehow imply this particularly bad contemporary is worthwhile?

Because the GGP -- you? -- didn't specify "the absolute worst of those contemporaries" but just complained about how "front triples" -- which implies all front triples -- "suck". So the GP quite reasonably showed that they don't.

It's not him moving the goalposts; it's you.

[theelous3]

I mean, if you want to be that literal about it I guess I can't fault you. I would expect someone to scope the conversation appropriately. The tripple I'm talking about is in the context of tripples on brand new 600 dollar e-mountain bikes. They will all be trash.

Is that a fairer statement, or would you like to just say I'm once again moving the goalposts by clarifying?

[CRConrad]

> Is that a fairer statement, or would you like to just say I'm once again moving the goalposts by clarifying?

No it isn't and yes I would: Now you're trying to move the conversational goalposts by calling your moving of the goalposts "clarifying".

This conversation simply never was about your snobbish True Mountain-Biking Scotsman perspective, and no amount of your attempts at obfuscation will make it have been so.

[jimmaswell]

I considered secondhand, but a used battery has a good chance of being bad or on the way out, and a good new battery is expensive.

I doubt this bike is going to be ewaste soon though. I know a few people I might give it to who might use it. And I drive old cars into the ground instead of buying new so far, so I think I have a good track record on waste.

Even if I wanted to just throw it out, the battery and frame are recyclable.

[EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK]

If you use an e-bike, should you be called e-athlete?