34/26 Enough for Riding Mont Ventoux?

bianchi dude said:

I will be in France around the middle of July to watch the
TDF - with a couple of side trips to ride the grand
mountain passes.

Mont Ventoux is on my list and being that I've never
ridden a mountain pass (lots of long "hills" in MN, but
nothing over a mile continuous), I'm anticipating that I
will need to scrap my 39/53 for a "Tyler"
50/34 compact crank. So, I'm wondering if anyone in the
Masters 4/5 ability range has ridden Mont Ventoux on
this type of setup without resorting to walking half-
way up? Switching to a triple crank is not economically
possible.

I've researched all the gear inches and pedal forces on
AnalyticCycling.com, but am still not sure if the 50/34
setup will be low enough to handle 12 miles of 7+ percent
average grades. I'll be attempting this on a 23 lbs. steel
Bianchi Veloce. FWIW, I'm 6'1" and 165 lbs.

Anyone out there made it on a double? Stories &
suggestions welcome.

Thanks

Don't know what masters 4/5 is but I rode up Mont Ventoux
and many of the Tour de France cols in the Pyrenees and Alps
in 1994 when I was aged 28 on 39x24.

Quoted message said:

Don't know what masters 4/5 is but I rode up Mont Ventoux
and many of the Tour de France cols in the Pyrenees and
Alps in 1994 when I was aged 28 on 39x24.

Ouch! While it's certainly possible for a fit person to ride
up Mont Ventoux in such gearing, for most it wouldn't be
very enjoyable. Mont Ventoux is one of the most monotonous
climbs in existence, with a very long stretch of unvarying
grade in the 9.5% range that drives you nuts.

Lower gearing would be preferable, since it would allow you
to vary your climbing style on the way up.

Ventoux is also not a climb to attempt in questionable
weather (either too hot or too cold). For information on a
rather disastrous day on Ventoux-
chainreaction.comletape2000.htmOpen ↗. And for a more
favorable day on the mountain-
chainreaction.comdiaryfrance.htmOpen ↗

--Mike Jacoubowsky Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com IMBA, BikesBelong, NBDA member

"MSeries" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

bianchi dude said:

I will be in France around the middle of July to watch
the TDF - with a couple of side trips to ride the grand
mountain passes.

Mont Ventoux is on my list and being that I've never
ridden a mountain pass (lots of long "hills" in MN, but
nothing over a mile continuous), I'm anticipating that I
will need to scrap my 39/53 for a "Tyler"
50/34 compact crank. So, I'm wondering if anyone in the
Masters 4/5 ability range has ridden Mont Ventoux on
this type of setup without resorting to walking half-
way up? Switching to a triple crank is not
economically possible.

I've researched all the gear inches and pedal forces on
AnalyticCycling.com, but am still not sure if the 50/34
setup will be low enough to handle 12 miles of 7+
percent average grades. I'll be attempting this on a 23
lbs. steel Bianchi Veloce. FWIW, I'm 6'1" and 165 lbs.

Anyone out there made it on a double? Stories &
suggestions welcome.

Thanks

Don't know what masters 4/5 is but I rode up Mont Ventoux
and many of the Tour de France cols in the Pyrenees and
Alps in 1994 when I was aged 28 on 39x24.

At my present age of 44 and weigth of 75 kg/1.78 meter I
would leave home with 52-42-30 in front and 13-23 behind. If
I would ride with 52-39 I would use a cassette with +28 a
lightest gear

--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by Bianchi Dude
...Mont Ventoux is on my list...
Anyone out there made it on a double? Stories &
suggestions welcome.

I rode Ventoux last year at age 42. I use 39x53 chainrings and a 13-28 freewheel. Most folks in the group I was with rode triples but a couple of guys had 39x53 and 12-25.

I also passed quite a few guys slogging it out on the middle of their cassette - probably 39/17 - and down around 30rpm :eek: Ouch - my knees hurt just thinking about that!

But 34/26 (~2.75m) is not that much lower than 39/28 (~2.9m). If you're not certain about what you might need, I recommend going lower - 34/28 or even 34/30.

I've toured the Alps with various gears and find having
lower gears are nice. Currently I choose to put on bigger
cogs rather then switch the cranks. I use 50-38 up front,
and 9-speed 12-34. So I needed to buy a set of cogs and a
long cage rear der. The 12-34 cluster has nice even sized
jumps all the way up.

Bruce

"bianchi dude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I will be in France around the middle of July to watch the
TDF - with a couple of side trips to ride the grand
mountain passes.

Mont Ventoux is on my list and being that I've never
ridden a mountain pass (lots of long "hills" in MN, but
nothing over a mile continuous), I'm anticipating that I
will need to scrap my 39/53 for a "Tyler"
50/34 compact crank. So, I'm wondering if anyone in the
Masters 4/5 ability range has ridden Mont Ventoux on
this type of setup without resorting to walking half-
way up? Switching to a triple crank is not economically
possible.

I've researched all the gear inches and pedal forces on
AnalyticCycling.com, but am still not sure if the 50/34
setup will be low enough to handle 12 miles of 7+ percent
average grades. I'll be attempting this on a 23 lbs. steel
Bianchi Veloce. FWIW, I'm 6'1" and 165 lbs.

Anyone out there made it on a double? Stories &
suggestions welcome.

In the woodworking newsgroups they have this thing called a
drive-by gloat. That's a post that ostensibly asks a
question, but the real purpose is to gloat over a new tool
or a great deal or something similar. Proper netiquette is
to use the word "gloat" in the subject line.

If this isn't a drive-by gloat, I don't know what is!! Dude,
you suck! Going to France, watching the tour, riding the big
climbs... I hope you get stuck without the low gear you
need. I hope Ventoux fries or freezes your butt (preferable
both)! I hope... ah hell! I hope it's all you want it to be,
and I hope I get there some day!

[email hidden] (bianchi dude) wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

I will be in France around the middle of July to watch the
TDF - with a couple of side trips to ride the grand
mountain passes.

So, I'm wondering if anyone in the Masters 4/5 ability
range has ridden Mont Ventoux on this type of setup
without resorting to walking half-way up? Switching to a
triple crank is not economically possible.

A buddy and I rode Ventoux all three ways last summer (had a
house in Sablet for 3 weeks) using 50/39s with a 13/26s and
had no problem. He was 60 and I was 63 at the time but we do
live in Vancouver and there are lots of local mountains to
practice on.

Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles said:

... Ventoux is also not a climb to attempt in questionable
weather (either too hot or too cold). For information on a
rather disastrous day on Ventoux-
chainreaction.comletape2000.htmOpen ↗....

Mike,

Be happy your ride was better than Tom Simpson's July 13,
1967 ride up
Mt. Ventoux.

--
Tom Sherman – Quad City Area

It's not an issue of gearing but one of being prepared. Some
people climb this thing on a 42 x 21, some climb it on a 24
x 32. I found a 38 x 28 plenty low in the Alps for pretty
comfortable riding.

Be fit, ride lots of hills before you go. Learn how to pace
yourself. While not having done Ventoux yet, I found that
riding Minnesota hills was mostly adequate training to get
up l'Alpe-d'Huez, Sarenne, Croix de Fer, Galibier, Lauteret,
Izoard, Vars, Cayolle, etc. Dehydration on a hot hot day up
the Galibier was the biggest problem.

Contrary to the rantings of sports announcers on
television, these climbs are not inhumanly difficult. It
takes an hour to an hour and a half for an ordinary
(Master's Cat 4) rider to get up them. Take your time,
enjoy the view, you'll be fine.

Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles said:

Quoted message said:

Don't know what masters 4/5 is but I rode up Mont Ventoux
and many of the Tour de France cols in the Pyrenees and
Alps in 1994 when I was aged 28 on 39x24.

Ouch! While it's certainly possible for a fit person to
ride up Mont Ventoux in such gearing, for most it wouldn't
be very enjoyable. Mont Ventoux is one of the most
monotonous climbs in existence, with a very long stretch of
unvarying grade in the 9.5% range that drives you nuts.

9.5% isn't really so bad - the Ordnance Survey single-arrow
hill is 14%-20% and the double-arrow 20%+, and it's a single-
arrow hill that persuaded me to reduce below 39x28.

Let's see; en route to Whitby I went up a couple of 18%
hills in a 34x34 - obviously much less tall than Ventoux,
but tall enough that there was no possibility of bulling up
them. A 39x24 is 1.6 times as tall a gear, for a hill half
as steep - it doesn't seem prohibitive to me...
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> Kill
the tomato!

David Damerell <[email hidden]> wrote:

: Let's see; en route to Whitby I went up a couple of 18%
: hills in a 34x34 - obviously much less tall than Ventoux,
: but tall enough that there was no possibility of bulling
: up them. A 39x24 is 1.6 times as tall a gear, for a hill
: half as steep - it doesn't seem prohibitive to me...

Have you ever cycled in the Alps or the Pyrenees? There's no
comparision.

I ride that route York -> Whitby in 39x23. I'm taking 34/26
to the Alps this summer. You may not "bully" your way up the
hills, but you aren't going up that at a sustainable pace
either unless you really gear down.

Which of course 34x34 is. Now try climbing 10k at 9% in
39/24. It's also a *very* non-trival difference that
French grades are quoted as average climb per km, UK
grades are peak.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune clune.orgclune.orgOpen ↗ "Technolibertarians make a
philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Ouch! While it's certainly possible for a fit person to
ride up Mont Ventoux in such gearing, for most it wouldn't
be very enjoyable. Mont Ventoux is one of the most
monotonous climbs in existence, with a very long stretch
of unvarying grade in the 9.5% range that drives you nuts.

Agreed. Just being able to choose a different cadence once
in a while on a long climb is nice. I used a 42/26 most of
the time on Ventoux, but shifted down at times to a 30/19.
Legs get bored of the same climbing cadence.

Hey Mike, want to do Everest Challenge this year? I've
signed up. It's at the end of September, so it hopefully
won't be so hot. I did a few of the climbs last weekend,
they are long but not hard. The climb up to Schulman Grove
(19.7 mi, 5.5%) reminded me of Ventoux. All it needed was a
big tower at the top.

everestchallenge.comeverestchallenge.comOpen ↗

--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA bike.terrymorse.combike.terrymorse.comOpen ↗

I can see where this might appear as a veiled attempt to
gloat. Rest assured though, that this is not a driveby gloat
at all. Strictly trying to make sure I don't have a stroke
pushing too high a gear.

Also, I want to ensure that I have enough gas in the tank to
hit Alpe d'Huez two days later! OK, now that was a gloat. 🙂
(hey, it's a once-in-a-lifetime thing, you know?)

Arthur Clune said:

David Damerell said:

Let's see; en route to Whitby I went up a couple of 18%
hills in a 34x34 - obviously much less tall than Ventoux,
but tall enough that there was no possibility of bulling
up them. A 39x24 is 1.6 times as tall a gear, for a hill
half as steep - it doesn't seem prohibitive to me...

I ride that route York -> Whitby in 39x23.

How do you know you rode "that route"? You don't know where
I was coming from!

Quoted message said:

this summer. You may not "bully" your way up the hills, but
you aren't going up that at a sustainable pace either
unless you really gear down.

Analytic Cycling says 4mph up an 18% grade is 250W, which is
quite sustainable for a fit amateur.

[80kg bike and rider, 0.06 frontal area because I certainly
am not in an aero crouch on climbs, not that it makes much
difference at 4mph.]

Quoted message said:

Which of course 34x34 is. Now try climbing 10k at 9%
in 39/24.

Well, that's 1.6 times as tall a gear, but I expect one
might like to use a slightly higher cadence, so let's call
it 8mph. Analytic Cycling has that at 270W. This doesn't
seem prohibitive.

I take your point about average grades versus peak, though;
but I observe that our own Jobst Brandt, in article
<[email hidden]>, claims to ride the Alps
with a low gear of 46/24.

Actually having been stuck on a recent 55 mile ride with an
inoperable front derailleur and a low 52/28 I certainly
don't feel low gears are vital if one can climb standing
with extremely low cadence.
--
David Damerell <[email hidden]> flcl?

Quoted message said:

Mike,

Be happy your ride was better than Tom Simpson's July 13,
1967 ride up
Mt. Ventoux.

On my first trip up Ventoux, it wasn't better than Tom
Simpson's ride... they turned us around at the Chalet 5km
short of the top because somebody had died of exposure, and
a great number of cyclists were being plucked off the road
and put into buses and ambulances, suffering from
hypothermia. It was a very, very, very bad day on the
mountain. Of course, we didn't know that somebody had died,
we just knew that we wanted to get to the top, and they
weren't letting us. It was one of the low points in my
cycling career... to be so close, and yet not there. I would
have crawled to the top if I could have!

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
chainreactionbicycles.comchainreactionbicycles.comOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

It's not an issue of gearing but one of being prepared.
Some people climb this thing on a 42 x 21, some climb it
on a 24 x 32. I found a 38 x 28 plenty low in the Alps for
pretty comfortable riding.

Be fit, ride lots of hills before you go. Learn how to
pace yourself. While not having done Ventoux yet, I found
that riding Minnesota hills was mostly adequate training
to get up l'Alpe-d'Huez, Sarenne, Croix de Fer, Galibier,
Lauteret, Izoard, Vars, Cayolle, etc. Dehydration on a hot
hot day up the Galibier was the biggest problem.

I've ridden the Pyrenees, the Alps, and Ventoux. Ventoux is
in an entirely different category. Nowhere else was I ever
forced to use my lowest gear (39x27). Most French climbs are
long, but not all that steep, and the steepest parts are
broken up. Take Alpe D'Huez, for example. That hill is just
plain fun! Once you get past the first kilometer or so, you
have hairpins where the road flattens out and steep sections
between. Plus numbered corners, telling you how far you've
been and how far you have to go.

Quoted message said:

Contrary to the rantings of sports announcers on
television, these climbs are not inhumanly difficult. It
takes an hour to an hour and a half for an ordinary
(Master's Cat 4) rider to get up them. Take your time,
enjoy the view, you'll be fine.

In general, I agree. The record for Alpe d'Huez is what, 36
minutes or so? I can climb it in almost exactly an hour.
But... if I were to try and climb Alpe d'Huez at the end of
a long ride, it might be another thing entirely!

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
chainreactionbicycles.comchainreactionbicycles.comOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

I take your point about average grades versus peak,
though; but I observe that our own Jobst Brandt, in
article <[email hidden]>, claims to ride
the Alps with a low gear of 46/24.

Even Jobst admits that such high gears don't work for people
who didn't get used to them early on. He also represents an
extreme example, and is as much proof of alien contamination
of our DNA pool as is the SR71.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
chainreactionbicycles.comchainreactionbicycles.comOpen ↗

Terry Morse said:

Quoted message said:

Ouch! While it's certainly possible for a fit person to
ride up Mont Ventoux in such gearing, for most it
wouldn't be very enjoyable. Mont Ventoux is one of the
most monotonous climbs in existence, with a very long
stretch of unvarying grade in the 9.5% range that drives
you nuts.

Quoted message said:

Agreed. Just being able to choose a different cadence once
in a while on a long climb is nice. I used a 42/26 most of
the time on Ventoux, but shifted down at times to a 30/19.
Legs get bored of the same climbing cadence.

Quoted message said:

Hey Mike, want to do Everest Challenge this year? I've
signed up. It's at the end of September, so it hopefully
won't be so hot. I did a few of the climbs last weekend,
they are long but not hard. The climb up to Schulman Grove
(19.7 mi, 5.5%) reminded me of Ventoux. All it needed was
a big tower at the top.

Quoted message said:

everestchallenge.comeverestchallenge.comOpen ↗

We don't need no steenking Ventoux, in California we got our
own Sonora Pass in the Sierra 9624ft with long sections of
+20% grades, as in:

chainreaction.comsonora pass.htmOpen ↗

I ride this a couple of times a year with my usual 46-24t
ratio. To make up for that, many routes in the alps are over
12% for long stretches, just to name some well known ones
(Nigerjoch) Road to Tiers 24%, Fedaia 13%, Gerlos 17% or
Gross Glockner Road 12%. Even the top of the Galibier has
13% jaunts from the south. These are all reasonably
manageable for people in good riding condition.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

It's not an issue of gearing but one of being prepared.
Some people climb this thing on a 42 x 21, some climb it
on a 24 x 32. I found a 38 x 28 plenty low in the Alps
for pretty comfortable riding.

Be fit, ride lots of hills before you go. Learn how to
pace yourself. While not having done Ventoux yet, I found
that riding Minnesota hills was mostly adequate training
to get up l'Alpe-d'Huez, Sarenne, Croix de Fer, Galibier,
Lauteret, Izoard, Vars, Cayolle, etc. Dehydration on a
hot hot day up the Galibier was the biggest problem.

I've ridden the Pyrenees, the Alps, and Ventoux. Ventoux
is in an entirely different category. Nowhere else was I
ever forced to use my lowest gear (39x27). Most French
climbs are long, but not all that steep, and the steepest
parts are broken up. Take Alpe D'Huez, for example. That
hill is just plain fun! Once you get past the first
kilometer or so, you have hairpins where the road
flattens out and steep sections between. Plus numbered
corners, telling you how far you've been and how far you
have to go.

Ventoux is indeed long and steep, although that's also the
case for any of the hors categorie hills in the Alps and
Pyrenees. Alpe-d'Huez is a fun hill (and was my first
mountain ever) at a sensible pace.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Contrary to the rantings of sports announcers on
television, these climbs are not inhumanly difficult. It
takes an hour to an hour and a half for an ordinary
(Master's Cat 4) rider to get up them. Take your time,
enjoy the view, you'll be fine.

In general, I agree. The record for Alpe d'Huez is what,
36 minutes or so? I can climb it in almost exactly an
hour. But... if I were to try and climb Alpe d'Huez at the
end of a long ride, it might be another thing entirely!

When I was in the Alps in 2002, another guest at our chambre-
d'hote was there training for La Marmotte, which he had won
once. The route is Bourg-d'Oisans to Croix de Fer to
Telegraphe to Galibier and finish in Huez. That would be a
long day out! That loop without Alpe-d'Huez was enpough for
me at 95 deg F...