Bottom gear on a Dawes Galaxy



V

vernon

Guest
I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket on my
Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is there any point
in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket to get an 18" bottom
gear?

What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?
 
vernon wrote:
> I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket on my
> Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is there any point
> in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket to get an 18" bottom
> gear?
>
> What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?
>
>

Depends how slow you can cycle and still stay upright IME. My hill
climbing is limited by balance and not by gear inches (assuming a
reasonably low gear is available)

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon
 
vernon wrote:
> I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket on my
> Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is there any point
> in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket to get an 18" bottom
> gear?
>
> What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?

Yow! That's way lower than anything I've ever had on either a tourer or
an MTB, for loaded touring including in mountainous terrain such as the
Schwarzwald, the Alps, and central Italy.

In North Wales on a 1983 tourer having a 42/34 (35 inch?) granny gear
I learned to discipline myself _not_ to use bottom gear on some of the
passes. It simply induced me to go too slowly, get impatient, speed
up, and get knackered (I've never been fit enough to carry on past the
point where I'm panting). And that was also carrying full camping gear.

--
Nick Kew
 
"Nick Kew" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> vernon wrote:
> > I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket on
my
> > Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is there any
point
> > in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket to get an 18" bottom
> > gear?
> >
> > What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?
>
> Yow! That's way lower than anything I've ever had on either a tourer or
> an MTB, for loaded touring including in mountainous terrain such as the
> Schwarzwald, the Alps, and central Italy.
>
> In North Wales on a 1983 tourer having a 42/34 (35 inch?) granny gear
> I learned to discipline myself _not_ to use bottom gear on some of the
> passes. It simply induced me to go too slowly, get impatient, speed
> up, and get knackered (I've never been fit enough to carry on past the
> point where I'm panting). And that was also carrying full camping gear.

I have a mental crossover point where I compare the cycling speed with
walking speed and if there's a close match I will get off and push *but*
sometimes there is a psychological victory to be had if you can just crest
the summit of a long drag. I am not frightened of getting off to push. I
had
some longish walks on the Ron Kitching memorial ride last weekend :) I
am just wondering if there is anything to be gained by having an even lower
gear than I already have. Being less porky and carrying less gear is
probably
a better solution I think on reflection.
 
in message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
('[email protected]') wrote:

> vernon wrote:
>> I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket
>> on my
>> Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is there any
>> point in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket to get an
>> 18" bottom gear?
>>
>> What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?
>
> Depends how slow you can cycle and still stay upright IME. My hill
> climbing is limited by balance and not by gear inches (assuming a
> reasonably low gear is available)

From mountain biking experience, on a hill steep enough to use that gear
your main problem will be keeping the front wheel on the ground.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Our modern industrial economy takes a mountain covered with trees,
;; lakes, running streams and transforms it into a mountain of junk,
;; garbage, slime pits, and debris. -- Edward Abbey
 
> From mountain biking experience, on a hill steep enough to use that gear
> your main problem will be keeping the front wheel on the ground.

Ah but I'm a lard ass and any assistance that will help to battle gravity is
welcome :)

Have been giving the matter some though since originally posting the
message. What
I'd like to do has more to do with what I think I'd like to do and that is
to conquer more
hills than I currently do. As someone who had peaked at 24 stone when first
returning
to cycling *all* hills were a challenge at the beginning.

My weight has been roller coastering over the past few years and
encouragingly is on
a downward trend at the moment and is just above 20 st. I'm coming round to
the idea
that further weight loss and packing less gear in my panniers may well have
a similar
effect to lowering the bottom gear. I now have a new question...

what percentage weight loss would offer the same advantage as going from a
21" gear to 18" ?

I hope it's not a direct(ly?) proportional relationship...losing a seventh
of my bodyweight is not
an option over the next five weeks..
 
vernon <[email protected]> wrote:

: what percentage weight loss would offer the same advantage as going from a
: 21" gear to 18" ?

Very little I suspect. Loosing only a few kilos makes an ernormous difference
on the hills.

Certainly loosing 5 kilos would be *way* more difference than that. I suspect
that as little as a couple of kilos would make that much difference.

Arthur


--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
The struggle of people against power is the struggle
of memory against forgetting - Milan Kundera
 
vernon wrote:
> I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket
> on my Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is
> there any point in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket
> to get an 18" bottom gear?
>
> What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?

I don't exactly qualify as a "tourer" but I have a bike that does :)
......24 x 30: gets me and a heavy load of luggage up some very steep
hills. But you should have whatever *you* want. It's always worth
experimenting with gears.

Note: an "MTB" rear mech will probably be needed for a 32T.

Re balance: Mountain bikers manage 22x32 (and that's with a 26" wheel) so
why shouldn't tourers too?

~PB
 
> I don't exactly qualify as a "tourer" but I have a bike that does :)
> .....24 x 30: gets me and a heavy load of luggage up some very steep
> hills. But you should have whatever *you* want. It's always worth
> experimenting with gears.

Weight loss as mentioned elsewhere in the thread might be a viable
alternative.
>
> Note: an "MTB" rear mech will probably be needed for a 32T.

I think the Alivio that I have fitted is an MTB mech
>
> Re balance: Mountain bikers manage 22x32 (and that's with a 26" wheel) so
> why shouldn't tourers too?

The more that I think about the gearing the more I see it as a 'security
blanket' issue
the hills that currently make me get off and push are likely to be the same
hills that
I get off and push for regardless of the gearing as I'm sure that some of
the hill climbing
problems I have are in my head and I tire mentally before I tire physically.
The thought
that I could conquer more hills with lower gearing may well be pie in the
sky. Besides,
weightloss is a healthier alternative :)
 
"vernon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket on my
> Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is there any point
> in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket to get an 18" bottom
> gear?
>
> What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?

I have 22 front and 34 rear. I find I need it riding mountains with four
panniers and a tent. Still have to push on occasions.

Ken.
 
vernon wrote:
> The more that I think about the gearing the more I see it as a
> 'security blanket' issue
> the hills that currently make me get off and push are likely to be
> the same hills that
> I get off and push for regardless of the gearing as I'm sure that
> some of the hill climbing
> problems I have are in my head and I tire mentally before I tire
> physically. The thought
> that I could conquer more hills with lower gearing may well be pie in
> the sky.

I'm not sure you'd get off and push if cycling was physically easier than
walking, and that point does come when the hill is steep enough and the
gear low enough.

> Besides, weightloss is a healthier alternative :)

Bad news: some of us skinny geezers find climbing hard work too :)

~PB
 
Pete Biggs <p@honeydewbiggs{remove_melon}.tc> wrote:

: Bad news: some of us skinny geezers find climbing hard work too :)

"It never gets any easier, you just go faster". Greg LeMond.



--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
The struggle of people against power is the struggle
of memory against forgetting - Milan Kundera
 
vernon wrote:
> I currently have a 22 tooth granny ring and a 28 tooth rear sproket on my
> Dawes Galaxy giving a bottom gear of around 21 inches. Is there any point
> in investing in a cassette with a 32 tooth sprocket to get an 18" bottom
> gear?

> What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?

Mine's just under 23" on the Streetmachine (30 -> 34 driving a 26"
wheel). It's got me up everything I've ever tried short of some
silly off-road on gravel, with full camping gear. It's a heavy
bike to start with, and 4 panniers full makes it quite a tank, and
I'm not exactly a bean-pole either. When I re-gear it, though,
I'll take it down to about 19", but do bear in mind it *is* a fair
bit heavier than the Galaxy and I can't stand up on the pedals even
if I want to.

Roos has just geared her Fiero down with the front chainmwheel
going from 52 to 42 before it hits the DualDrive 11-34 and 20"
wheel, which gives about 18-19" at the bottom IIRC. However, that
hasn't completely solve her problems with hills to the extent she'd
hoped because you've still got to do the work, and she's had most
of her cycling career in a country with no hills. The fact remains
that the best way to get good at hills is do lots of hills :-(

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Simon Brooke wrote:

> From mountain biking experience, on a hill steep enough to use that gear
> your main problem will be keeping the front wheel on the ground.

The tourer's perspective isn't as steep, but may well involve
several miles of it over a day with more the next day and 4
panniers full of camping gear.
IME the MTB equivalent of a Nasty touring hill is a moderate (by
MTB standards) slope but a long one, on a grass meadow without a
track through it... Any given meter of travel is not a technical
problem, but a few hundred of those meters do sap energy and have
me clicking through to the low gears.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"Arthur Clune" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> vernon <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> : what percentage weight loss would offer the same advantage as going from
a
> : 21" gear to 18" ?
>
> Very little I suspect. Loosing only a few kilos makes an ernormous
difference
> on the hills.
>
> Certainly loosing 5 kilos would be *way* more difference than that. I
suspect
> that as little as a couple of kilos would make that much difference.
>
I did an Audax today and am 4.5 kg lighter than I was last week. I found
the hills easier going
and was faster in my opinion on nearly all of them.. Now if I could lose the
weight of my
camping gear before I do LEJOG I migh be able to complete it at the
mid-range Audax speeds :)

Vernon
 
"Arthur Clune" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Pete Biggs <p@honeydewbiggs{remove_melon}.tc> wrote:
>
> : Bad news: some of us skinny geezers find climbing hard work too :)
>
> "It never gets any easier, you just go faster". Greg LeMond.
>
I can never aspire to compare myself with the likes of LeMond but i did
find myself, at times today,
travelling faster than I normally would for the same exertion on an Audax
ride. Perhaps if I dropped
8 stone a better comaparision could be made :)
 
vernon <[email protected]> wrote:

: I can never aspire to compare myself with the likes of LeMond but i did
: find myself, at times today,
: travelling faster than I normally would for the same exertion on an Audax
: ride.

It does make a lot of difference doesn't it? And it'll only get better as
you continue to lose the weight


: Perhaps if I dropped
: 8 stone a better comaparision could be made :)

Sadly, even when you weigh the same as the pros, the lack of lungs and legs
shows ;(


--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
The struggle of people against power is the struggle
of memory against forgetting - Milan Kundera
 
vernon wrote:

> What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?

Speedmachine: 24/34, 559 wheel = 17"
Mountain bike: 22/34, 559 wheel = 16"
Trice: 24/34, 406 wheel = 13"

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Never tie your shoelaces in a revolving door.
 
Arthur Clune wrote:

> : Perhaps if I dropped
> : 8 stone a better comaparision could be made :)
>
> Sadly, even when you weigh the same as the pros, the lack of lungs and legs
> shows ;(

True enough, but an 8 stone lighter version of Vernon would kick the
current one's **** on any hill.

--
Dave...

Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the
future of the human race. - H. G. Wells
 
Dave Larrington wrote:
> vernon wrote:
>
>
>>What bottom gears do the tourers use here on u.r.c. ?
>
>
> Speedmachine: 24/34, 559 wheel = 17"
> Mountain bike: 22/34, 559 wheel = 16"
> Trice: 24/34, 406 wheel = 13"
>
Help the thicko out please. . .

My old MTB has 28/38/48 and 14/16/18/21/24/28/32 gears. I was hoping to
use it for touring now that I've acquired a full suspension rig for the
hills. I was a bit worried that, with road tyres, I'd not have a high
enough top gear for decent speed. However, I'm now also worried that the
weight of any luggage will result in not enough low gear either. Am I
missing something?

(and where do these 17"/16" figures come from?


druidh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Bottom Gear Cable Race
Replies
9
Views
324
UK and Europe
Rob Morley
R
S
Re: what bottom bracket and gear mech for latest project..
Replies
12
Views
479
UK and Europe
emma
E
G
Re: what bottom bracket and gear mech for latest project..
Replies
0
Views
390
UK and Europe
Graham Dean
G
T
External bearing bottom brackets
Replies
7
Views
749
UK and Europe
Pete Biggs
P
G
Sourcing bottom bracket cable guides
Replies
4
Views
774
UK and Europe
Graham Ashton
G
Top Bottom Back