Sandy said:Dans le message denews:[email hidden],
[email hidden] <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :
Quoted message said:And of course a triple solves all problems since you get nice 53-42-30
rings and can use the nice 13-26 cassette with a straight block 13-19
then 21-23-26. And cheaply change the 30 ring to 28 or 26 or 24 for
$10 or less and get even lower gears. Lots of nice overlap so you are
not gong back and forth all the time on a compact.
Each person can ask and answer his own Q. I moved from a 44 to a 42 whenI
hit a point, and to a 39 at another point. Both with 23 at the back. Now,
20 years after the first change, I have a 13-29 cassette that does not get
used ; rather it's the 13-26. On a normally hilly ride, I touch the 21 a
little, and for real climbs, I get to the 23 and 26 for a bit. I won't wear
them out soon. Those are bailout gears, too.
The original question asker has a 39x24 low gear now and wants lower
gears. With a 53-39 double and 13-26, 39x26 low is not much lower.
With a 13-29, 39x29 does get him quite a bit lower. Maybe not low
enough though.
Quoted message said:
So, if I find myself in the last two cogs more often, I can go to a compact,
which gives me 3 normally stepped gears further, and the big ring loses one.
That's not yet, and won't be probably for another 3-5 years. You have to
have a pretty big deficit in riding power to "need" a triple, which gives
you bailout, not normal riding gears, beyond that.
In the mountains a triple is very useful. In many hilly parts of the
USA it is also useful. San Francisco Bay area for instance. Short-
medium extremely steep hills. Mr. Brandt and others grind up them.
Many don't want or can't grind and power up hills for a half mile,
mile or so. Triple is very useful. Many people just enjoy riding,
not racing or pretending to race. Recreation. They want to
comfortably climb the hills they run into. Slowly climb them. But
climb them without hurting their knees or over exerting themselves.
Triple is very useful.
Quoted message said:
While a triple satisfies a mathematical model, the rider just needs to be
honest with himself and choose based on his real riding. Having a potential
of 4-6 more gears that don't see a chain seems a waste, when you can have
useful ratios that are complicated with the triple setup.
How does a triple complicate ratios and make them not useful? I used
a 13-26 9 speed cassette with a double 53-42 and a triple 52-42-30
very well. If you don't want to use the inner ring, don't shift onto
it. Quite simple with Ergo. Just use the 53 and 42 rings with the
13-14-15-16-17-19-21-23-26 or add the 18 if 10 speed 13-26 cassette.
For me, the front
Quoted message said:two are kind of on/off positions that don't confuse me.
My triple crank has about the same chainrings as my double crank,
52-42 for the triple and 53-42 for the double. Nothign confusing
about that. On/off if you want to think of it that way. Triple just
adds a 30 or 28 or 26 or 24 inner ring too. I don't have to use it.
Remembering the
Quoted message said:exact transition points with a gear chart on the h-bar seems contrived, and
landing in a bad ratio without this chart could well make riding less
pleasant.
Compact doubles have the bad ratios from the transition point. Not
triples or doubles for the most part. 53-42 or 52-42-30 and a 13-23
or 13-26 cassette lets you run the 42 ring up to the mid 20s before
you need to go to the big ring. Or you can run the big ring down to
about 15mph before needing to go to the 42 ring. And the 42 ring lets
you go down to about 8mph before needing to go to the inner ring. No
bad ratios, no bad transitions, all very pleasant shifting with a
52-42-30 triple.
Quoted message said:--
Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine
*******
La vie, c'est comme une bicyclette,
il faut avancer pour ne pas perdre l'équilibre.
-- Einstein, A.
