-
This is kinda my point - my setup shifts into every gear - why do I need a WT, unless it had some magic way of making shifting better?
I would like better shifting but it's pushing the limits of the RD so I'm happy to have ok shifting and big fuckoff gears at the back. The only difference with mine is the 50T big ring that I could probably drop to 46T but would that make much difference? It might improve shifting a little since I could run a slightly shorter chain but is it going to be enough to justify another chainring?
hippy-
I really enjoy the 46 front ring because it expands my useable range of the rear cogs. I've swapped all my bikes to 46 on the front. On a 50 tooth I don't touch the smallest 3 cogs. With a 46 I have more choices but still don't use the 11. For me a 46 makes a huge difference.
I'm curious about a 44 so i'm working on a project with a Force 22 crank, a 2x North Shore Billet (NSB) spider with an MTB 104 BCD, and 44/28 rings. The Ultegra 8000 front mech is happy with that small of rings on the frame I am experimenting with. But there are some serious chainline and front mech interference issues I'm trying to sort out with spacers. It is not looking to promising at the moment but if I nail it then this will be my new off-road setup. The Force cranks can be quite flexible by changing the spider but these types of projects are not for everyone. Lots of time and money spent experimenting but I like that sort of thing.
Bob_Thod
Ok so another session of Joy of Baik Tech with Bob Thod ;)
Disclaimer: It's been a couple years since I went through so please accept some inaccuracies in what I'm sharing. I dont have time to redo maths and re-research before typing.
If I remember right the more distance the mech pully is away from the cassette, the slower the shifting and the wear is accelerated on the cassette + chain. This then wears the front rings faster.
Shimano doesn't "support" a bigger cassette than a 34T for the 11spd Ultegra. When doing the math explained at the Wolftooth RLDM website on rear mech capacity, the numbers also indicate this doesn't/shouldn't work. But yet it works. It shifts fine. Why? Well, one example could be when running a 46/34 at the front, there is a difference of 12 teeth instead of 16. This makes the rear mech happier. Maybe that is the key?
Back when I went through all this I reached out to Wolftooth support, which was fantastic btw. They helped me understand what was going on, why and what I needed for the solution I was looking for. Because I wanted to run an 11-42 cassette on the back and front chainrings with a 16 tooth difference, such as 46/30 or 50/34, the only option is to use an 11 spd XT GS rear mech because it's the only one with enough capacity to handle that amount of chain slack. The WT Tanpan is then necessary to change the pull ratio of the road shifters to make the XT mech move the correct amount.
The body of the Ultegra and XT rear mech are pretty much the same dimensions. This allows the Ultegra to step up to the larger rings such as up to 40 without the pully colliding with or riding on the biggest ring.
So why does the WT RLDM exist? I don't know. Because WT need to make money? Or maybe there is a good technical reason, but as we see from the rig that got @Skinny through Italy with no issues, on there was an 11-40 rear, 46/34 front and no RLDM. So to sort of repeat his words on the Terravail tires and Petervary, if that setup works for @Skinny, then it will work for the rest of us mortals. If for some reason it doesn't, then try a RLDM.
And as @Skinny said, get the RX series with the clutch.
Part numbers for reference:
RD-RX800-GS for cable
RD-RX805-GS for Di2