Changed Gearing, Easier Climbing

[David L. Johnso]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:02:18 +0000, bfd wrote:

> Alternatively, instead of swapping out your crank/bb to a "mt" one, a simplier solution may be to
> do what others have said and downsize your current chainrings.

There may be little if any savings in doing this. Chainrings can be pricey; they are much cheaper as
part of a crankset.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | It doesn't get any easier, you just go faster. --Greg LeMond _`\(,_ | (_)/ (_) |

 

[Rick Onanian]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 18:44:39 -0500, Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>I climb hills in a 42/16. Then I go down them in a 42/16. On the flats, I use a
>42/16. And what's this thing I see where people can stop pedaling while they ride? I don't get
> that.

It's called modern technology, and is what people who aren't masochists ride.
--
Rick Onanian

 

[x]

RE/
>(but I rarely use the 52)

Maybe this is simplistic, but my approach on my two bikes has been to determine the highest gear I
can push for any extended time and then choose my big ring based on that.
--
PeteCresswell

 

[David Reuteler]

In rec.bicycles.tech Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
: I climb hills in a 42/16. Then I go down them in a 42/16. On the flats, I use a
: 42/16. And what's this thing I see where people can stop pedaling while they ride? I don't get
: that.

heh. glad you're enjoying it.

any growing pains? or lapses of coasting repression? i still get those every so often at the crest
of a long hill -- i'll sit down and somewhat forcefully stop pedaling as a kind of victory dance.

oops.

mostly i've kind of gone to the lowest common denominator and when i ride my free-wheeled bike i'll
do the opposite and "coast" fixed gear style where you just kind of relax your legs and let 'em go
along for the ride. i get creeped when the pedals stop turning.

anyway, don't let the nay-sayers turn you from the OneTruePath(tm).
--
david reuteler [email protected]

 

[Kevan Smith]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:25:49 -0700, "Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> from Cox Communications wrote:

>
>Knees? We don't need no steeenkin' knees!

Knees are so easily replaced these days, and you can get them in Titanium, too!

--
real e-mail addy: kevansmith23 at yahoo dot com car accident takes the necessary and dark dogs

 

[Rosco]

"Zog The Undeniable" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> rosco wrote:
>
> > Specialites TA makes a 24 tooth inner ring that should fit on a road triple. Of course you have
> > to be aware of the spec's on your front and
rear
> > deraileurs to make sure it can handle the extra range.
>
> Not many FDs will handle more than a 26T difference. My XT one doesn't, so I'm limited to 52-42-26
> on the touring bike. Of course the OP could drop to a 50T big ring, but that's a lot more money.
>

The OP did say he didn't use his 52 much. As you say it adds $'s to the solution, but maybe going to
a 50 or 48 would make it more useful, and then his FD could handle a smaller granny. Why have a
bunch of gears you don't use?

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:02:18 +0000, bfd wrote:
>
> > Alternatively, instead of swapping out your crank/bb to a "mt" one, a simplier solution may be
> > to do what others have said and downsize your current chainrings.
>
> There may be little if any savings in doing this. Chainrings can be pricey; they are much cheaper
> as part of a crankset.

This is true. I've bought a whole new crank a couple of times because it was cheaper than 3 new
chainrings. However, these days a different crank may not work with your existing BB -- either
because of axle type, or just chainline. Just beware that with a crank change, you might need a BB
too -- so budget for
it.

What's really frustrating is that some Shimano cranks (like mine) sometimes won't shift right unless
the *exact* replacement chainring is used.

Matt O.

 

[David L. Johnso]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:03:49 +0000, Rick Onanian wrote:

> It's called modern technology, and is what people who aren't masochists ride.

Hmm. We ride up hills that we could drive up with no trouble -- and more community respect. We're
all masochists.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | There is always an easy solution to every human problem - neat, _`\(,_ | plausible, and
wrong. --H.L. Mencken (_)/ (_) |

 

[David L. Johnso]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 04:50:18 +0000, Matt O'Toole wrote:

> Just beware that with a crank change, you might need a BB too -- so budget for it.

Good point, but bottom brackets are cheap.
>
> What's really frustrating is that some Shimano cranks (like mine) sometimes won't shift right
> unless the *exact* replacement chainring is used.

Yet another reason to use Campagnolo shifters.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | This is my religion. There is no need for temples; no need for _`\(,_ | complicated
philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our (_)/ (_) | temple. The philosophy is kindness.
--The Dalai Lama

 

[David Kerber]

In article <[email protected]>, Kevan@mouse- potato.com says...
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:27:02 -0400, David Kerber <ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net> from Warren Rogers
> Associates wrote:
>
> >
> >I use my 52/11 quite a bit; a LOT more than I do the 30/32 granny. There are several hills on my
> >regular rides where I spin out in the
> >52/11 going down, and climb them in the 42/21 or 42/24. If I'm tired, I might drop to the 30/24
> > or 30/28, but I only use the 30/32 if I'm really lazy.
>
> I climb hills in a 42/16. Then I go down them in a 42/16. On the flats, I use a
> 42/16. And what's this thing I see where people can stop pedaling while they ride? I don't get
> that.

It's a new-fangled thing called a "free wheel" or a "free hub". I guess it hasn't made it into your
part of the country yet. <GGGGG>.

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Bob M]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 18:44:39 -0500, Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:27:02 -0400, David Kerber <ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net> from Warren Rogers
> Associates wrote:
>
>>
>> I use my 52/11 quite a bit; a LOT more than I do the 30/32 granny. There are several hills on my
>> regular rides where I spin out in the
>> 52/11 going down, and climb them in the 42/21 or 42/24. If I'm tired, I might drop to the 30/24
>> or 30/28, but I only use the 30/32 if I'm really lazy.
>
> I climb hills in a 42/16. Then I go down them in a 42/16. On the flats, I use a
> 42/16. And what's this thing I see where people can stop pedaling while they ride? I don't get
> that.
>
>

My knees are much happier now that I have a triple. my 39, 53 front was killing me. Now, I have a
30, 42, 52 front and can happily spin up hills instead of grinding up them.

It's weird. If I ride in the afternoon, I can get up most hills in the 42 front. When I ride in the
morning (which is now close to freezing), I need the 30 for the same hill. Also, the last 5 miles of
my ride is brutally hilly, and I often need the 30 -- after 55 miles, hills become a pain.

--
Bob M in CT Remove 'x.' to reply

 

[Rich Clark]

"Bob M" <[email protected]> wrote in message news[email protected]...
> If I ride in the afternoon, I can get up most hills in the 42 front. When I ride in the morning
> (which is now close to freezing), I
need
> the 30 for the same hill.

It's the increased air density at lower temperatures. And the lower pressure in your tires when
they're cold. Yeah, that's the ticket.

RichC

 

[David Damerell]

Roy Zipris <[email protected]> wrote:
>the mid-single digits. More of a masher than a spinner, I ride a Lemond Buenos Aires with 105
>triple components; the front chainrings are, I think, 30-42-52 (but I rarely use the 52), and on
>the rear, nine cogs (12-25, I think). What changes to the front and/or rear gears could I consider
>to give me that extra gear to spin a bit more on grueling climbs?

If you rarely use the 52, you may as well change the cassette for one with a lower range, like a
13-28 or a 13-34. Less hassle and expense than changing chainrings - of course you'll fall off the
top of the 42 earlier, but you'll equally be able to stay with the 52 longer once you've changed
into it, so this probably doesn't mean more front shifts.
--
David Damerell <[email protected]> Kill the tomato!

 

[Ron Abramson]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 04:52:24 -0700, Roy Zipris wrote:

> A recreational club rider, I climb the hilly, rolling terrain around here (SE Pennsylvania) not
> too badly, but sometimes wish I had one more gear to shift into when the hills get too long and I
> slow down to the mid-single digits. More of a masher than a spinner, I ride a Lemond Buenos Aires
> with 105 triple components; the front chainrings are, I think, 30-42-52 (but I rarely use the 52),
> and on the rear, nine cogs (12-25, I think). What changes to the front and/or rear gears could I
> consider to give me that extra gear to spin a bit more on grueling climbs? I'm getting older and
> it's not getting any easier. Thanks. Roy Zipris

12-27 is another available Shimano road cassette size. If you can forego having close ratios, you
might want to go for an 11-32 Shimano XT (MTB) cassette, for which you will need a rear derailer
that can accommodate the large cog, such as an XT or XTR. I use the 11-32 cassette and an XTR rear
der. on my cross bike (albeit with a single ring (42) front setup), and it works really great.