Home > Bike Types > Road Bike

Falco brings narrow/wide 1x chainrings to triathlon for simpler, faster times

Written by Tyler Benedict
26 Comments
Support us! Bikerumor may earn a small commission from affiliate links in this article. Learn More

Falco voice 1x narrow wide chainring for triathlon bikes with dura-ace cranksets

It was probably only a matter of time before narrow/wide chainrings made their way to the pavement. Falco Bike, who you may remember more for their Tron-inspired V-wing aero bike, has gone ahead and skipped right over standard road bikes in favor of triathlon.

Their new chainring mounts to the asymmetric 110BCD bolt pattern of the latest Shimano Dura-Ace and Ultregra, as well as the compatible SRM power meter crankset. The chainring is CNC’d from 7075-T6 alloy and comes in at just 147g for a 54-tooth, the only size offered. According to the press release, tooth profiles are made to offer just a bit of chain retention since, in the absence of shifting, dropped chains during triathlon are pretty rare. Instead, the profiles are focused on smooth, quiet performance…and saving watts.

They claim a 1.5-2.5 watt savings over an Ironman distance ride, netting you about 35 extra seconds on the run. If the course is hilly, it can be combined with a 32-tooth little ring cassette cog just in case, though we’re guessing that’d make for some big jumps between gears compared to a standard road cassette. Retail will be $99, we’re waiting to hear back on availability.
Tyler Benedict
11,282 articles

Tyler Benedict is the Founder of Bikerumor.com, where he’s been writing about the latest bikes, components, and cycling technology for almost two decades. Prior to that, Tyler launched and built multiple sports nutrition brands and consumer goods companies, mostly as an excuse to travel and ride in new places.

Based in North Carolina, Tyler also loves the Vanlife & family adventure travel and is always on the lookout for the next shiny new part and off-grid adventure.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

26 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pancakes
Pancakes
9 years ago

ROCK ME AMADEUS

0
Reply
Terry
Terry
9 years ago

How can you shift between rings with narrow/wide chainrings? How to guarantee the narrow/wide teeth will line up? I thought narrow/wide was limited to 1X for this reason?

0
Reply
CXisfun
CXisfun
9 years ago

@Terry: “in the absence of shifting” has to be the answer. Because you’d never be able to ensure you’d align the chain correctly on a shift. It would work exactly 50% of the time I guess.

How do they measure watt savings over a distance? You can measure watts saved for a fixed speed, but if it saves 2w it shouldn’t matter if you’re saving 2w for 500ft or 112mi.

0
Reply
Patrick
Patrick
9 years ago

Hmm….interesting.

A 52 chainring matched with the 11-40 XTR cassette would be nearly identical range as a 52/36 matched to the current 11-28. For us 10 speeders, a 52 chainring matched to an 11-36 rear would be nearly identical range as a 52/36 matched to an 11-25.

I think I sort of support this!

0
Reply
Patrick
Patrick
9 years ago

“Sort of” referring to jumps between shifts.

The gaps between shifts are not noticeable on a mt bike even on a 10-42. They would probably be a bit more pronounced for TT/Tri.

0
Reply
iamtinny
iamtinny
9 years ago

I’ve been looking for this for a TT build that I am doing – it’d be perfect for single ring setup on any course that you’d not need the smaller front chainring. Now just offer it in 130bcd.

0
Reply
Mike
Mike
9 years ago

Please please please offer a 130BCD (5 bolt). I’ve been wanting to build a TT bike this way for years but didn’t want to use a chain retention device (like MRP).

Also, this is a great candidate for (cheaper) Di2 hacking…

0
Reply
Derek
Derek
9 years ago

Using this with a 34T is just a half baked BikeRumor idea that won’t actually work. At least Falco isn’t claiming this will work with a 34. There isn’t an FD that can handle a 20T jump. Your RD probably can’t handle it either if you have a normal amount of range in your cassette.

0
Reply
dead
dead
9 years ago

I hope they make it in a 55!

0
Reply
Jo-slow
Jo-slow
9 years ago

In all my local triathlons, I need my 39 front ring unless I get a new RD and new wide range cassette. It’s pass for me : I prefer 12-25 & 39-53.

0
Reply
Tyler Benedict
Author
Tyler Benedict
9 years ago

Derek – it wasn’t our idea, read the PR link. If you need a double, get a proper double.

0
Reply
Collin S
Collin S
9 years ago

, that is referring to a 34T rear cassette IE SRAM WiFi shifting.

0
Reply
chuck
chuck
9 years ago

The press release never mentions a 34 tooth anything. It does, however, mention using this chainring with a 32 tooth cog.

0
Reply
Dockboy
Dockboy
9 years ago

@dead,
Narrow-wide can’t work on odd-sized rings, you’d get narrow-narrow or wide-wide at some point, and your chain would jam once per revolution.

0
Reply
PMC
PMC
9 years ago

It will be lighter when the drill the 5th chainring bolt hole 😀

0
Reply
PMC
PMC
9 years ago

…………..or is it Dura Ace only????

0
Reply
Champs
Champs
9 years ago

54t might be good for flat courses or sprint tris.

For better or for worse, smaller rings and no-drop 1x would do good service for much of the tri community…

0
Reply
Tyler Benedict
Author
Tyler Benedict
9 years ago

Collin – good catch, I misread the PR. Article corrected. Thanks!

0
Reply
greg
greg
9 years ago

New road standard rear spacing will go to 140with 13 speed cassettes and 1x drivetrains.

Mark my words.

0
Reply
dontcoast
dontcoast
9 years ago

@Champs

That is so true, and very diplomatically put!

0
Reply
rupert3k
rupert3k
9 years ago

Pleased to read comments from other astute Rumor reading cyclists who know the road 1x revolution is coming.
Where is my tubeless 1x12sp Venge Disc with bolted axles?
Love to buy a tasty road bike but coming from a MTB background I find the absence of 1x tubeless hydraulic road bikes most irritating.
True it’s a compromise today, (with 11sp) but as soon as the full sequential range of say, DI2 Dura, is possible from 1 x 15 or something, multiple chain rings will be pointless.

0
Reply
JBikes
JBikes
9 years ago

rupert – unless you need a preassembled bike, you can buy a disc road frame and very easily construct your “1x tubeless hydraulic road bike”

I don’t mind 1x for the road, but as someone that loves 1 tooth cog jump between shifts, I’ll pass until maybe your 1×15 comes available (I was under the impression that chain and cog width have more to do with it than rear mech precision?) Maybe a 1×11 on my road commuter, but then its also my touring bike so that also wont work…
Options are good though. Bring the 1x (and keep the 2x & 3x).

0
Reply
rupert3k
rupert3k
9 years ago

Love the bikes I already assembled like that, doesn’t stop me craving a 1x Venge Disc frame though.
Tarmac Disc is closest, or maybe a Crux at a pinch but I love the bolted axles on mountain bikes & hope we see a road version soon.
Also hoping that new road disc mount system becomes available shortly:
https://bikerumor.com/2014/07/09/shimano-announces-new-flat-mount-disc-brake-standard-for-road-bikes/ along with some lighter 2nd or 3rd gen brakes.
Perhaps then we can get closer to caliper weight, not much chance of sub 7kg otherwise.
I found the Rumor article on the new axle standard quite interesting and would like something similar for road.
I know it’s daft but I’d like to believe it’d improve handling like it does offroad:
https://bikerumor.com/2014/12/19/2016-axle-standards-part-1-rear-148mm-thru-axle-coming-fast-its-about-more-than-just-better-wheels/
Surely if 142 or 148 axles improve the stiffness of 29’er wheels, they also improve road wheels given they’re same size?
Just as we see mtb frames built specifically for 1x (without any front mech or cable routing), I don’t want my dream bike to to be built for a front mech I chose not to install.
Although a heavier wider cassette will mitigate some of the weight savings, I’d also like to think ditching a shifter, mech, ring & cable will negate the extra disc weight too.
Surely it’d be easier fitting 16sp with a 148 vs 135 axle?
Every couple of years we get the opportunity to pay lots for 1 extra gear.
Back when 7 speed XT Hyperglide first came out everyone was saying “oh noooo, too narrow, stick with 5 or 6 speed!”
Every time it’s the same, holdouts howling the new chain is too fragile, but we all know… sure as houses, there will be 12,13,14 etc.
Demented rant ends.

0
Reply
Fisher
Fisher
9 years ago

Awesome! I was really getting sick of dropping my chain every time I rode my TT bike through a rock garden! I nearly put a chain guide on my Speed Concept, lucky this narrow wide TT ring came along hey?!

0
Reply
James
James
9 years ago

Give me a 48t or 50t and for 110 and I see a lot of changes coming to my tri bike this winter.

0
Reply
BINNY
BINNY
9 years ago

Just to clarify, we have made some efforts to improve smoothness of the chain ring compared to a typical MTB 1X11 ring. That said, the main focus of the wide-narrow design is prevention of chain drop. Notice tri bikes have shorter chain stay and bigger ring than MTB setup, so chain line is indeed a more difficult thing to work through. At the end of the day, it’s a matter of tradeoffs and individual needs. The temptation of a 1X11 system is significant and the aero benefits is real. The harder question is whether it is for you and the race course you have in mind. If this product can help SOME folks for SOME of the races, then the $99 is well spent.

0
Reply

Subscribe Now

Sign up to receive BikeRumor content direct to your inbox.