Climbing gears

Ozark Bicycle said:

bfd said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:... Anthony DeLorenzo said:

In a 39-34, getting to the top of the Stelvio from Prato could take
all day.

Maybe, but for some riders it might be the only way to get up to the top.

You ride what, a 49/47 front chainrings with a 13x24 or 13x26 freewheel in
the back? If your "lowest" gear is 47x26, you have a "gear inch" of about
47.7.

In contrast, in the alps, Lance supposedly rode a 53/39 in front and 12x25
in the rear. His "low" of 39x25 gave hima gear inch of about 41.2.

Conclusion: Baron Munchhausen is a stronger climber than a very high
level professional cyclist....

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear
and Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing
twice the power of Jobst.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!

aka Jobst Brandt said:

...
A 30.3" gear gives about 5.4mph at a cadence of 60, which I don't see
as practical. I haven't seen any tourists, or for that matter, sports
riders turning that fast on long grades.

I like to climb in low gears with a cadence of at least 90 rpm. Pushing
big gears is too hard on my knees, and takes more effort.

However, I expect that Jobst is close to one end of the physiological
spectrum in this matter, and I am near the other.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!

bookieb ??? said:

Tom Nakashima said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

<snip>

Quoted message said:

For
long distance climbing, I stay seated with the higher cadence, and only on
the steep grades do I get out of the saddle. I've also learned to pace
myself and not push my limits.
-tom

Agreed.
I now drop the gears at the bottom of the climb, before I need to,
set a comfortable cadence, stay in the saddle as much as possible, and
stay out of the red zone.

As I have a road triple, I never *have* to get out of the saddle, but
sometimes I will, just to stretch out and get of the saddle for 20-30
seconds, or to punch up around a hairpin bend or similar.

Lots of guys in my group pull away from me at the bottom of the climb,
but I'll catch and pass a fair proportion of them again about 2/3 of
the way to the top. Hare and tortoise...

I have had the experience quite a few times of being passed on the
steeper portion of the slope, and then starting to gain on the same
riders once past the second point of inflection (where the slope starts
to decrease).

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!

Jay Beattie said:

Quoted message said:

Anthony DeLorenzo said:

> I agree. Given what everyone has said I think I am going to try a
> XT M770 11-34 cassette which runs 11 13 15 17 20 23 26 30 34 then
> if possible, which it appears to be, swap out the 11 and 13 for a
> 14 and 16 which will give me 14 15 16 17 20 23 26 30 34. Then
> couple this with a XT M771 (top normal) rear mech which I think
> will work ok with my Ultegra STIs.
I wouldn't take it for granted that you need a new rear derailleur.
I did a similar conversion for a friend who wanted lower gears
without moving to a triple, and I was able to get a short-cage 105
derailleur (rather old one, at that) to take up an 11-34 cassette.
It was basically maxed in the big-big and small-small combos, and I
had to tweak the b-screw and move the axle a little in the dropouts
to get the derailleur around the 34-tooth cog, but once it was set
up it worked without a hitch. You might at least try it before you
spring for a new derailleur.

I don't get it. The Alps are no steeper (except Austria) than
mountain roads in the USA. Just because famous bicycle races go over
them, the passes are not as demanding as for instance Sonora Pass in
the Sierra. Just use your usual touring gears and get in shape.

Quoted message said:

Personally, I would prefer a bigger range with an 11-34 cassette,
but of course it's a matter of personal preference.

You don't need to pedal down these mountains, and you don't need to
sprint at 30+mph in an 11t sprocket. I take it this isn't a UCI race.

In a 39-34, getting to the top of the Stelvio from Prato could take
all day.

Hey, if it means he gets to the top, who cares. But, with that said,
a 34 tooth cog is suspiciously large -- which is no big deal, but it
means giant jumps and some less than optimal gears in the rollers and
flats. This ride is happening next year, and if it were me, I would
go do something with similar mileage and lots of climbs and see what
worked for me (although I already know -- this is the fictitious
"me"😉. I'd hate to lug around a pie plate for one climb at the end of
the day if I did not have to -- particularly at the expense of my
beloved 13 and 19. -- Jay Beattie.

Well, people used to (and many still do) get by with 4 to 8 gears on a
cassette or freewheel. Why not use a cluster that is relatively tight
for the first 7 or 8 ratios, then has a low "bail out" gear? If one is
bogging down in the next to lowest gear, the large jump to the biggest
rear gear is not unwelcome in my experience (28T to 34T).

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!

Tom Sherman said:

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear
and Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing
twice the power of Jobst.

Both develop the same power. Jobst at 50rpm produces twice the torque
of Lance at 100rpm.

--
Adam Kadlubek

"Adam Kadlubek" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tom Sherman said:

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear
and Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing
twice the power of Jobst.

Both develop the same power. Jobst at 50rpm produces twice the torque
of Lance at 100rpm.

--
Adam Kadlubek

Wow, Jobst can climb the Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Lance?
Impressive.

Lou

graham said:

Just starting to plan for doing the La Marmotte in France next year - 174km
taking in the col du Glandon, col du Galiber and finishing with the climb up
to Alpe d'Huez. Currently I have a Shimano Ultegra groupset with a 53/39
octalink chainset. My lowest geared cassette is a 12-27 giving a bottom gear
of 37.7. Having studied the race profile I am thinking about taking
something a bit lower just to be on the safe side. Alpe d'Huez with 160km
(100 miles) in my legs looks a bit daunting.

My initial thoughts are either a triple 52/42/30 which would get me down to
29 with my 12-27 or sticking with the 53/39 and going for a 12-34 cassette
to give 29.9.

I would welcome any advice on the most economical way to go. Mostly this
comes down to what will work with what. E.g. will a triple fit on my current
bottom bracket. Can I cut the cost by using a 105 or perhaps a lower spec (I
doubt if I'll use the kit for more than one or two of these adventures).
Will my current Ultegra front mech shift a triple. What rear mech can I get
to shift a 12-34 and if not Ultegra will it be compatible with my Ultegra
STIs etc

Personally I like the idea of a compact double: lighter, simpler and
still gives a good spread of gears. With a 48-34 you can keep your
current derailleurs and cluster and still have a nice low of 34 gear
inches. If this is not sufficient, you can get a cluster with a 30 or
32 tooth big cog, which might be stretching the derailleur's capacity
somewhat. When you are done touring, you simply switch to a closely
spaced 12-21 or 12-23 cassette. I don't know why more road bikes
aren't set up this way.

My current bike is also set up in this way with a 12-32 eight speed
cluster which provides a 28.7 inch low. Even with 14.5 kg of bicycle
and 15.9 kg luggage (not including food, water and fuel) it got me up
all the hills I encountered in central Germany. Nothing of the scale
of the alps, but lots of hills nonetheless.

I would also tend to agree with Jobst that there is no substitute for
good conditioning and if you are carrying little or no luggage, your
current spread might well be adequate. I have also used the same
cluster with a 52-42 in the front which gives a 35 inch low. Also
with a full touring load, (no camping gear this time) this got me up
all the hills I encountered in East and South Germany, though again,
nothing of the scale of the Alps. BTW, I used a Shimano 600 rear
derailleur (although an older, non index model) and it handled the
wide spread of cogs just fine. I have a Campy long-cage mech on my
current set-up, but I don't know why I didn't try it with the
original, short-cage derailleur. It probably would've worked just
fine.

Lou Holtman said:

"Adam Kadlubek" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 18 Pa , 07:04, Tom Sherman <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear
and Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing
twice the power of Jobst.

Quoted message said:

Both develop the same power. Jobst at 50rpm produces twice the torque
of Lance at 100rpm.

Quoted message said:

--
Adam Kadlubek

Wow, Jobst can climb the Alpe d'Huez in the same time as Lance?
Impressive.

That's nothing! Baron Munchhausen rode a cannonball and also took a
trip to the moon.

Adam Kadlubek said:

Tom Sherman said:

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear
and Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing
twice the power of Jobst.

Both develop the same power. Jobst at 50rpm produces twice the torque
of Lance at 100rpm.

--
Adam Kadlubek

I don't think you saw the numbers correctly. At 100 rpm in a 40"
gear, Lance is climbing at 11.9 mph. At 40 rpm in a 50" gear Jobst is
climbing at 7.4 mph. I thought power was the ability to move
something, more or less. Jobst does weigh more than Lance. But that
4.5 mph difference has to be mostly due to more power developed by
Lance.

"Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear and
Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing twice
the power of Jobst.
Tom Sherman

Climbing cadence is what you feel comfortable in. JB is a tall person,
and probably feels more comfortable in a lower cadence. As I recall
Miguel Indurain (Big Mig) also had a lower cadence in the climbs.

Out of the TDF riders, Pantani had the fastest time up Alpe d'Huez at
37'35", just a second faster than Lance in 2004 37'36". Out of the low
cadence climbers, Jan Ullrich posted a 38'23" in 1997, while Big Mig had his
fastest time of 39'28" in 1995. Greg LeMond also had a lower climbing
cadence and posted a 48'00" the same time as Bernard Hinault in 1986.

As for chainrings and clusters, you'll have to find what works best for
your climbing cadence rhythm. Once you find that rhythm, you can fine tune
your drivetrain.
-tom

Tom Sherman said:

Quoted message said:

... A 30.3" gear gives about 5.4mph at a cadence of 60, which I
don't see as practical. I haven't seen any tourists, or for that
matter, sports riders turning that fast on long grades.

Quoted message said:

I like to climb in low gears with a cadence of at least 90
rpm. Pushing big gears is too hard on my knees, and takes more
effort.

Quoted message said:

However, I expect that Jobst is close to one end of the
physiological spectrum in this matter, and I am near the other.

As I said, I have in all these years not seen anyone not part of a
bicycle race turn as high as 60 rpm on the major alpine passes. In
addition I watched Hampsten and Millar (Tour de Suisse) on the Klausen
Pass hill climb, turning less than 60rpm, especially Millar who rode
standing most of the way.

Jobst Brandt

Tom Nakashima said:

"Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear and
Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing twice
the power of Jobst.
Tom Sherman

Climbing cadence is what you feel comfortable in. JB is a tall person,
and probably feels more comfortable in a lower cadence. As I recall
Miguel Indurain (Big Mig) also had a lower cadence in the climbs....

A study comparing femur length and preferred cadence [1] would be
interesting. Is there a level of acceleration at the knee that riders
prefer not to exceed?

[1] Or for that matter, preferred crank length.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!

"Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tom Nakashima said:

"Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Not necessarily. Remember, power is torque multiplied by rotational
velocity. Therefore, if Jobst is pedaling at 40 rpm in a 50-inch gear

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Lance is pedaling at 100 rpm in a 40-inch gear, Lance is developing

twice

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the power of Jobst.
Tom Sherman

Climbing cadence is what you feel comfortable in. JB is a tall person,
and probably feels more comfortable in a lower cadence. As I recall
Miguel Indurain (Big Mig) also had a lower cadence in the climbs....

A study comparing femur length and preferred cadence [1] would be
interesting. Is there a level of acceleration at the knee that riders
prefer not to exceed?

[1] Or for that matter, preferred crank length.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!

There was a tall SKINNY kid in high who no one could beat in arm
wrestling. His forearms were at least 4"-6" longer than all the rest of us
which gave him a substantial mechanical advantage.

I always though the same thing about tall long legged rider???

Chas.

"Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A study comparing femur length and preferred cadence [1] would be
interesting.

I've heard cyclist with long femur make good climbers. You also don't have
to be tall to have a long femur as in Marco Patani's case.

Quoted message said:

Is there a level of acceleration at the knee that riders prefer not to
exceed?

Every rider is different and should know what not to exceed.

Quoted message said:

[1] Or for that matter, preferred crank length.
Tom Sherman

Choice of rider.

My seat tube angle is at 72 degrees, using a172.5mm crank arm length. My
cadence in the climbs is around 70rpm average. I ride with a 50/34 compact
crank with a 12- 23 9sp rear. I love having the close gear ratios in the
climbs. The 50t is for the flats and descents, and the 34t only sees the
climbs, it's pretty straight forward.
Climbing:
What I do is slide back on the saddle, put my hands on top of the bars in
more of an upright position, get into a cadence rhythm and call it a workout
at a comfortable pace.
I used to ride with a HRM, but I have my pace settings memorized now, so I
know when to shut it down without any instruments.
Once you get into good climbing shape, the training of exhaustion turns into
training of exhilaration.
-tom