What would you do to a Devinci Carbon GX?

[muted]

http://www.devinci.com/bikes/bike_791_scategory_188

Wife may buy this used. I'm thinking she should get carbon wheels, upgrade the brakes to ???? and get a bigger front rotor. I know nothing about SRAM, but it seems to be the slx equivalent? Or not? And also add a front derailleur / 2 front chainrings.

Wheels will save weight, more gears makes her a happier climber, and better brakes because I'm guessing the SRAM sucks based on the price point. And a bigger rotor because my 203 on my reign is quite nice.

Yes, I have done no research. Yet. Just following my gut and asking people who are knowledgeable here if I'm on the right track. Also, any other easy part replacement to save a bunch of weight, like cranks?

Other option is buying a Mach 6 new with XT/SLX build. But she can't afford to swap much, if anything, at that price.

[Flea]

Why swap stuff out if what it has works fine? Replace stuff as it breaks or wears out. That mach 6's slx/xt kit needs no replacing/upgrades. SLX is good enough for 99.7 % of the worlds riding population. I'd go with the mach 6. Nothing beats a weagle design. A VPP frame doesn't even come close, IMO

[muted]

Why swap stuff out if what it has works fine? Replace stuff as it breaks or wears out. That mach 6's slx/xt kit needs no replacing/upgrades. SLX is good enough for 99.7 % of the worlds riding population. I'd go with the mach 6. Nothing beats a weagle design. A VPP frame doesn't even come close, IMO

Good to know. I was going to recommend a seat dropper for the Mach 6 though, that's a requirement. And as I said before, we are not swapping out much if she gets that bike, we are just wondering about the Devinci parts.

The reason for swapping is because the wife wants a dream bike. She could save a bunch of money by buying the Devinci and put the rest of the money in the bank, but she's not. I am more practical and would ride shit until it broke, and enjoy the money in the bank. But it's not my bike.

Anyone know about GX stuff, specifically the brakes?

[radam]

GX stuff is more than fine. Same for the Guide R brakes. You can get a bigger rotor if you want, but may or may not feel like you need it, depending what brakes you are coming from. I personally use Shimano brakes and will continue to in part because I like how easy they are to bleed.

If she really wants a 2x drivetrain and carbon wheels... go for it? I haven't ridden carbon wheels so I don't view them as anything other than a good way to blow a budget, but whatever floats your/her boat. Everything else on the Devinci seems solid. You could save some weight with new cranks or upgraded drivetrain/cockpit parts, but I don't see this particular bike ever being a flyweight machine.

[Vt-Freeheel]

Owning a used bike has never been a dream of mine.

[farmguy]

Before you do to a 2X...UGH!!! swap out the front 30t for a 28t. My wife went from a 32t to a 30t on her Transition Patrol and now she is hardly ever in the 42 anymore, (she is 60 yrs old.) You can climb walls with a 28T up front. Its cheaper, easy as hell to swap and WAY cheaper.

[milestogo]

Before you do to a 2X...UGH!!! swap out the front 30t for a 28t. My wife went from a 32t to a 30t on her Transition Patrol and now she is hardly ever in the 42 anymore, (she is 60 yrs old.) You can climb walls with a 28T up front. Its cheaper, easy as hell to swap and WAY cheaper.

Ditto, but make it a 28 or 30 oval. Significant difference for climbing over the round based on spinning one for a few weeks now.

[jono]

A 28T will make a 14% grade feel like a 13% grade on a 30T. What feels like a wall is always relative.

[Anospa]

Both are Weagle designed, nods towards descending for the Spartan. It won't be light or pedal super fast.

If you are not going to be riding lifts, swap tires to exo casing, that'll drop a good chunk of weight. Don't bother with a front derailleur, get a 28-tooth ring if you really think she'll want more climbing gears.

[sethschmautz]

Slight thread drift. . .but there are some knowledgeable people here and it may pertain to the OP's question:

I am looking to change from 2x10 to 1x10 and am probably going to go with an oval chainring. From my gearing calcs, if I run a 30t (round) chainring and an 11-42 cassette, my low range will be find, but my top end will suffer a little. It sounds from the comments above as though you can add a few teeth with an oval chainring and it "feels" smaller. I.e. theoretically, I could go with a 32t cassette which gives me access to the high end, but I should be able to climb similarly.

Jono or milestogo?

Seth

[jono]

I think ovals help both ends, but how much and on which end you benefit more seems highly personal, probably just because we all pedal differently. So you might argue as you have and be right for some people, but conversely, others will find that they can spin a little faster with an oval so they'd rather go smaller and 'give up' a little on the high end.

The one thing I can say for certain is that if you fear really low rpms because of knee/joint issues an oval should help that noticeably on the low end because it will reduce the peak force required to turn the cranks over. That may not be as significant when it comes to spinning up a long climb when you are cardio limited, though, so if that's your typical use of your lowest gear you shouldn't expect as much from an oval there.

[milestogo]

I am looking to change from 2x10 to 1x10 and am probably going to go with an oval chainring. From my gearing calcs, if I run a 30t (round) chainring and an 11-42 cassette, my low range will be find, but my top end will suffer a little. It sounds from the comments above as though you can add a few teeth with an oval chainring and it "feels" smaller. I.e. theoretically, I could go with a 32t cassette which gives me access to the high end, but I should be able to climb similarly.

I went right from 32 round to 32 oval. I noticed a clear difference on the climbing ability, using a harder gear x2 on the cassette, sometimes x3 depending. Easier also to stand and hammer out the climb because of the even power distribution on the pedal stroke and easier to sit and spin as well. To be honest, I am rarely in the hardest gear, so I can't offer you much help there.

[sethschmautz]

Thanks guys - very helpful. The primary use of the top end is riding a little concrete to/from my house. It's fairly short - about 10 minutes each direction, but it would be nice to not have to sacrifice (much) speed by reducing the size of my chainring.

Seth

[muted]

What I can't wrap my head around is why so many people don't want a front derailleur. My handlebar is not 'cluttered' with a shifter, my front derailleur never breaks or needs much service. I don't have to do a spreadsheet on gears to get up hills, I don't have to figure out what hub goes with this boosty bro part or that in order to find the correct the gearing. More gears, more options, no thinking, no frustration, no dealing with another bike's issues that is not even mine. I have a strong suspicion that this is some dumb industry bullshit that while it DOES work for some riders great, for some riders it can be managed but just don't care about top-end (somehow they enjoy to sit and spin on roads), and for the rest of the riders it just doesn't work. Until they get something like 13-15 gears in the back.

On the other hand, I've never tried a bike without a derailleur, so I can't be sure on anything until I try it, and this bike is not for me. But she is super fast on downhills and needs a good top gear, and pretty slow on uphills and needs a super low gear. She is not going to get "used" to a harder low-end, that's a laugh. We have kids, we don't get in bike shape anymore.

/coolblogbro

[detrusor]

As far as xt on wheels, I was in the "don't waste the money camp" until I rode them. Night and day difference. Same weight but a million times stiffer. My bike became a point be shoot down whatever sketchy rock strewn off camber trail I was on.

[jono]

What I can't wrap my head around is why so many people don't want a front derailleur. My handlebar is not 'cluttered' with a shifter, my front derailleur never breaks or needs much service. I don't have to do a spreadsheet on gears to get up hills...

All true. For riders who can manage to avoid cross-chaining, getting into the big ring for descents helps retain the chain a little and the whole thing seems overblown. If you're tossing the chain into the BB every so often a narrow-wide chainring is a nice benefit, but the weight and complexity savings really seem to get more praise than they're worth.

[sethschmautz]

What I can't wrap my head around is why so many people don't want a front derailleur.

/coolblogbro

The beauty of the discussion is that these things are not one size fits all. One size fits many, and it's all dependent upon your use case. The thing that makes it attractive to me is the reduction of complexity (fewer moving parts, fewer adjustments, fewer pieces in general) and reduction in weight for a very small relative cost (small performance cost and small monetary cost). The gearing spreadsheet doesn't help me ride any better or faster, and I haven't used them until I started to consider this change - to figure out whether this seemed like a good move for me or not.

Seth

[jono]

The beauty of the discussion is that these things are not one size fits all. One size fits many, and it's all dependent upon your use case.

This. My wife's a cross-chainer, probably always will be, doesn't pedal much above a certain speed, and regardless of fitness has no problem getting off and walking at a certain pitch. She doesn't miss the front der at all and probably wouldn't bother going beyond 12 speeds in the rear unless #13 was weightless and free. 1x11 is working fine in the meantime.

[muted]

The beauty of the discussion is that these things are not one size fits all.

I agree that it can and does work great for some people, but the industry is pushing the one chainring bike on new bikes quite a bit.

[joetron]

1x spec on bikes is heavily driven by consumer demand, not necessarily the industry pushing from the top down.
It is trendy. Great for some, not really for others. I have a lot of conversations with a lot of shop folk about 1x and 2x

[Dantheman]

What I can't wrap my head around is why so many people don't want a front derailleur.

Chain drops, noise, and chain drops. Did I mention chain drops?

I don't have to do a spreadsheet on gears to get up hills

4th grade level math is busting your balls?

dealing with another bike's issues that is not even mine

Heh, I hear that one. I've had various versions of this conversation too many times:

"My bike is making a noise."

"OK, where?"

"The back."

"Where in the rear? Hub? Brake rotor? Frame?"

"I'm not sure."

"When does it make the noise? Under power? Coasting? Braking?"

"I'm not sure."

"Ummm, OooKaayy, I'll see what I can figure out."

[muted]

Chain drops, noise, and chain drops. Did I mention chain drops?

Fair point.

4th grade level math is busting your balls?

Ha! no, I haven't even done the math because i don't have it on my bike. Still, the chatter of boost non-boost, retro-fitting, adding a cog, etc. new hub or whatever I've read all these threads seems like a pain for some people. Sounds hard, maybe it's because they have older bikes? I really don't know but those threads are ridiculous. Actual experience of course is different, it may be easy if I tried, but I'm good.

Heh, I hear that one.

The good news is she is going from two bikes to one with this purchase. At one point she had 5 bikes....

[sethschmautz]

Ha! no, I haven't even done the math because i don't have it on my bike. Still, the chatter of boost non-boost, retro-fitting, adding a cog, etc. new hub or whatever I've read all these threads seems like a pain for some people.

http://gears.mtbcrosscountry.com/

Super easy to create a chart like the one below. This shows me where I came from (26" 3x9) to where I am now (29" 2x10) and where I'm thinking of going (29" 1x10 with either 28, 30, or 32 tooth chainring. It's very clear what the low and high gear ratios are for easy comparison with the min/max ratios. As you can see, when I made the jump from 3x9 to 2x10, I lost a little on the top and bottom. I have noticed more on the top end, and as I look at the numbers, that makes great sense.

When I make the jump to 1x10, I will need to determine what I'm willing sacrifice - high end, low end, or a compromise of both.

Seth

[Dantheman]

Ha! no, I haven't even done the math because i don't have it on my bike.

The typical 2x10 setup of 26/36x11-36 has a total gear ratio spread of 0.72-3.27. The typical 1x11 setup of 30x10-42 has a total gear ratio spread of 0.71-3.00. Low gears are maintained and you don't give up much on the high end.

Still, the chatter of boost non-boost, retro-fitting, adding a cog, etc. new hub or whatever I've read all these threads seems like a pain for some people. Sounds hard, maybe it's because they have older bikes? I really don't know but those threads are ridiculous. Actual experience of course is different, it may be easy if I tried, but I'm good.

If you want the SRAM cassette with the 10t cog you need an XD driver hub. Shimano 11sp fits standard freehubs, so no compatibility issues to worry about. The Sunrace wide-range 10sp cassettes have obviated the need for the add-on cogs, just forget they exist. 12 sp may require Boost hubs, but otherwise IIRC Boost is a frame is frame/hub compatibility issue and not a drivetrain/hub compatibility issue.

[muted]

i think I'll just go ride instead.