In search of lower gearing on road bike

[[email protected]]

A bicycle mechanic said I could change a 10 speed Ultegra 50/39/30 for
a 9 speed Xt 48/?/24 and keept the 10 speed ultegra 12/25 cluster in
back. I would also need an XT front derailer. He said the thickness of
the sprokets on the 9 speed would not be a serious problem. He said
Shimano would say it wouldn't shift right and their might be some minor
degregation in the shifting, but it probably would be minor.

What do you think?
Alan Acock
old guy facing really big climbs

 

[Jeff Starr]

On 25 Sep 2005 15:38:54 -0700, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>A bicycle mechanic said I could change a 10 speed Ultegra 50/39/30 for
>a 9 speed Xt 48/?/24 and keept the 10 speed ultegra 12/25 cluster in
>back. I would also need an XT front derailer. He said the thickness of
>the sprokets on the 9 speed would not be a serious problem. He said
>Shimano would say it wouldn't shift right and their might be some minor
>degregation in the shifting, but it probably would be minor.
>
>What do you think?
>Alan Acock
>old guy facing really big climbs

Hi, I think you should keep the Ultegra crankset which is probably
52/39/30 and just replace the 30 with something smaller. You might be
able to put a 24 on it, or 26 or 28.

If you can't go as low as the 24, on the Ultegra crank, then also swap
out the cassette for something lower. Harris offers both custom
cassettes and chainrings.
http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/parts.html

Doing both the chainring and the cassette will be cheaper than an XT
crankset and new XT FD.


Life is Good!
Jeff

 

[Chris Neary]

>I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested going
>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.

You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?


Chris Neary
[email protected]

"Prize the doubt, low kinds exist without"
- Inscription at Ramsmeyer Hall, Ohio State University

 

[Brian Walker]

"Chris Neary" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested going
>>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.
>
> You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?

If I have either no wind or a slight tail wind I'm riding about 30mph.
25mph - 30mph would be a slight drag from the wind and on flats. It just
depends on the terrain and the ride. It's when I get over 30mph that I lose
the push from the gears and end up just maintaining the speed more than
anything.

18mph - 20mph would be a stronger drag of wind and/or hills. When I get
that, I just change direction or call for the van...

I had to go to my LBS Saturday and get some tape on my handlebars. It's a 10
mile ride across three cities to get there from my house. My wife asked if I
wanted her to take me, and I said "if I can't ride it, I don't need it"
(being the tough guy <g>). I got out onto the road and found the winds were
head wind gusts of up to 30mph from that storm in south Texas. I went on and
rode it, but it wasn't fun! I kept looking down seeing my speed of 13mph and
such and I was giving it all I had. I kept thinking about the thread in here
not long ago about "It's the tailwind stupid" and kept thinking seriously
about getting off the bike and calling for the van. I got to the LBS and the
shop owner was surprised I made it with those winds and conditions. After he
taped the bars and I left, I found out just how aerodynamic those bars are
with the new tape. By golly, I was hitting almost 40mph on the flats going
home! I added it up, and ended with an average speed of ~18mph for the round
trip. That's the best tape I've ever had put on a set of handlebars! <g>

 

[Jeff Starr]

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:50:41 -0700, Chris Neary
<[email protected] > wrote:

>>I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested going
>>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.
>
>You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?
>
>
>Chris Neary

52 -11 is 30mph at a cadence of 81rpm. Apparently the guy is really
fast.


Life is Good!
Jeff

 

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

> >I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested going
>>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.
>
> You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?
>
>
> Chris Neary

55/11 is good for a whole lot higher than 30mph. Hope that guy has bionic
knees! I installed a compact crank last year (50/34 with a 12/27 in back)
and couldn't be happier. I can still pedal at 44mph if need be (downhill
sprint, certainly not on the flats!!!).

OK, just checked it out, according to GearCalc, 30mph at 55/11 would be
77rpm. 35mph would still be turning the cranks over at a leisurely 90rpm.
Even triathletes turn 'em over faster than that.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com> [email protected]
>
> "Prize the doubt, low kinds exist without"
> - Inscription at Ramsmeyer Hall, Ohio State University

 

[Brian Walker]

"Jeff Starr" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 19:50:41 -0700, Chris Neary
> <[email protected] > wrote:
>
>>>I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>>>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>>>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested
>>>going
>>>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.
>>
>>You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?
>>
>>
>>Chris Neary
>
> 52 -11 is 30mph at a cadence of 81rpm. Apparently the guy is really
> fast.

I don't know about being really fast. My LBS calls me a "gear masher"
though. Any ideas what it means?

I don't know what cadence I do, I just pedal. I was told about the computers
that reads the cadence, but I haven't got one yet. I would've figured I
pedal at around 60rpm or so...maybe not.

 

[Brian Walker]

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> >I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>>>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>>>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested
>>>going
>>>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.
>>
>> You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?
>>
>>
>> Chris Neary
>
> 55/11 is good for a whole lot higher than 30mph. Hope that guy has bionic
> knees! I installed a compact crank last year (50/34 with a 12/27 in back)
> and couldn't be happier. I can still pedal at 44mph if need be (downhill
> sprint, certainly not on the flats!!!).

Try that 30mph tailwind that I had on Saturday! Busted my bubble when I
found out it wasn't the new handlebar tape that got me that fast! It's
pretty bad when the speed limit is 35mph and a bicycle is passing cars in
the left lane <g>

> OK, just checked it out, according to GearCalc, 30mph at 55/11 would be
> 77rpm. 35mph would still be turning the cranks over at a leisurely 90rpm.
> Even triathletes turn 'em over faster than that.

Nice, dude! Thanks!

I was just about to be thinking of myself as a "Greek God" or
something...now I'm not even working a sweat! You just made me feel like a
12 year old girl on a Schwinn. <g>

What is this GearCalc?

 

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

>> 55/11 is good for a whole lot higher than 30mph. Hope that guy has bionic
>> knees! I installed a compact crank last year (50/34 with a 12/27 in back)
>> and couldn't be happier. I can still pedal at 44mph if need be (downhill
>> sprint, certainly not on the flats!!!).
>
> Try that 30mph tailwind that I had on Saturday! Busted my bubble when I
> found out it wasn't the new handlebar tape that got me that fast! It's
> pretty bad when the speed limit is 35mph and a bicycle is passing cars in
> the left lane <g>

30mph tailwinds are rare enough that they wouldn't typically justify special
gearing for them, particularly since that would mean giving up more-useful
gears elsewhere. Unless, of course, you lived someplace where winds like
that were commonplace *and* it's flat. (My guess is that cycling isn't too
popular in such areas, since the 30mph tailwind probably occurs as often as
a 30mph headwind, which would be most unpleasant!).

>> OK, just checked it out, according to GearCalc, 30mph at 55/11 would be
>> 77rpm. 35mph would still be turning the cranks over at a leisurely 90rpm.
>> Even triathletes turn 'em over faster than that.
>
> Nice, dude! Thanks!
>
> I was just about to be thinking of myself as a "Greek God" or
> something...now I'm not even working a sweat! You just made me feel like a
> 12 year old girl on a Schwinn. <g>

I've seen 12-year-old girls on not-so-great bikes at the top of Mont
Ventoux. So you could still be tough as nails.

> What is this GearCalc?

A shareware program that calculates speed for a given input of chainring &
cog, along with a bunch of other interesting functions that I haven't yet
figured out.

In any event, your LBS appears to be correct when they pegged you as a "gear
masher" but they failed you in not telling you what that meant, including
the downsides to both your efficiency and the health of your knees.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

 

[Peter Cole]

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:

> In any event, your LBS appears to be correct when they pegged you as a "gear
> masher" but they failed you in not telling you what that meant, including
> the downsides to both your efficiency and the health of your knees.

Efficiency is actually better at low cadences -- which is why most TT
riders use them. Larger riders may prefer lower cadences. I have a 55 x
11 on one bike, 53 x 11 on another, I use those ratios. My knees are
fine, too.

 

[Mike Jacoubowsky]

>> In any event, your LBS appears to be correct when they pegged you as a
>> "gear masher" but they failed you in not telling you what that meant,
>> including the downsides to both your efficiency and the health of your
>> knees.
>
> Efficiency is actually better at low cadences -- which is why most TT
> riders use them. Larger riders may prefer lower cadences. I have a 55 x 11
> on one bike, 53 x 11 on another, I use those ratios. My knees are fine,
> too.

As Jobst has pointed out, gearing is also a function of what you got used to
way back in the day. The TT issue is a bit different than what's applicable
for most riders though. It (using extremely-high gearing) assumes quite a
few things, including-

#1: Steady-state riding with little need to accelerate. Definitely not for
use riding in a pack.
#2: No need for wide gear range, because there either aren't any big hills
*or* the racer is so strong that he/she can power up them and still keep a
reasonable cadence.
#3: Easier to stay in "drone mode" at lower RPMs, as you develop something
of a momentum effect in those big gears.
#4: Such high, sustained speeds that the cadence isn't all that low anyway.
TTs are run at 30mph+ these days, not like back-in-the-day when you were
strong if you could ride a 40k/25-miler in under an hour.

Those don't apply to "social" riding in groups (except where it's dead-flat?
Sorry, but I can't relate to that), and you'll notice that Grand Tour racers
(Giro, TDF & Vuelta) on long breakaways aren't using such high gears either.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

 

[gds]

I am always surprised by the range of gears being used at any point in
time by my regular riding partners. There are clearly folks who like to
mash high gears and others that like to spin in much lower gears. As
most of the folks I ride with are between 40 and 70 years old and are
very experienced it strikes me as though there are physiological
preferences that work differently for different folks.
Since no one seems to have knee problem I can only surmise that with
proper conditioning and within reason gear choice is just that- a
choice.

In terms of the original question. While I consider myself basically a
spinner I am often surprised by what seems to me very low gears
selected by some posters here. My lowest is a 39/26 and I find it gets
me up anything. Our group regularly rides up a mountain road that
averages 5% for 25 miles with the steepest section coming at the end
and probably around 9 or 10%.

 

[Peter Cole]

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>>In any event, your LBS appears to be correct when they pegged you as a
>>>"gear masher" but they failed you in not telling you what that meant,
>>>including the downsides to both your efficiency and the health of your
>>>knees.
>>
>>Efficiency is actually better at low cadences -- which is why most TT
>>riders use them. Larger riders may prefer lower cadences. I have a 55 x 11
>>on one bike, 53 x 11 on another, I use those ratios. My knees are fine,
>>too.
>
>
> As Jobst has pointed out, gearing is also a function of what you got used to
> way back in the day. The TT issue is a bit different than what's applicable
> for most riders though. It (using extremely-high gearing) assumes quite a
> few things, including-
>
> #1: Steady-state riding with little need to accelerate. Definitely not for
> use riding in a pack.
> #2: No need for wide gear range, because there either aren't any big hills
> *or* the racer is so strong that he/she can power up them and still keep a
> reasonable cadence.
> #3: Easier to stay in "drone mode" at lower RPMs, as you develop something
> of a momentum effect in those big gears.
> #4: Such high, sustained speeds that the cadence isn't all that low anyway.
> TTs are run at 30mph+ these days, not like back-in-the-day when you were
> strong if you could ride a 40k/25-miler in under an hour.
>
> Those don't apply to "social" riding in groups (except where it's dead-flat?
> Sorry, but I can't relate to that), and you'll notice that Grand Tour racers
> (Giro, TDF & Vuelta) on long breakaways aren't using such high gears either.

The difference between a 52 x 12 and a 55 x 11 is only around 15%.
Surely riders' preferred cadences can vary that amount? WRT efficiency,
I think you missed my point. Lower cadences are more efficient
(aerobically). When you are in an aerobic capacity limited mode, you'll
do better, all other things being equal, with a lower cadence. Sprinting
requires higher cadence to develop power, long-distance rides to delay
muscle fatigue.

Large riders typically have worse power to weight and better power to
drag numbers. That makes us relatively poor climbers but good on the
flats. On "social" rides with a rolling course, I've found I can catch a
group that has dropped me on a climb. I frequently break away on
descents and sometimes can stay away from a group of otherwise matched
individuals.

I ride a fixed gear a lot and can spin at 150 or so, but I develop my
maximum sustained power at much lower cadences, probably 50-60.

 

[Jeff Starr]

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 23:32:09 -0500, "Brian Walker"
<[email protected]> wrote:



>What is this GearCalc?
>
>

Gear Calc is a very useful tool for determining cadence, gear inches,
ratios, choosing gearing, etc.
Here is where you will find it:
http://www.income-software.com/index.htm?GearCalc/gc_index.asp

If your LBS is calling you a gear masher, that means that you are
pedaling at a low cadence in a higher than usual gear.

While having a cyclocomputer with cadence isn't necessary, I found it
helpful. I not only have it on my main bike, but I have it on the bike
I use in the off season, with my trainer.

My comfort level, when I first got it , was in the low 70s. Now I ride
in th mid 80s, often spinning up over 100. Two years ago, 100 was
impossibly fast. Raising my cadence has helped me to be a better
rider. it is hard for me to explain, other than I am able to ride
further and deal with adverse conditions a little better.


Life is Good!
Jeff

 

[Bob]

Peter Cole wrote:

> The difference between a 52 x 12 and a 55 x 11 is only around 15%.
> Surely riders' preferred cadences can vary that amount? WRT efficiency,
> I think you missed my point. Lower cadences are more efficient
> (aerobically). When you are in an aerobic capacity limited mode, you'll
> do better, all other things being equal, with a lower cadence. Sprinting
> requires higher cadence to develop power, long-distance rides to delay
> muscle fatigue.
>
> Large riders typically have worse power to weight and better power to
> drag numbers. That makes us relatively poor climbers but good on the
> flats. On "social" rides with a rolling course, I've found I can catch a
> group that has dropped me on a climb. I frequently break away on
> descents and sometimes can stay away from a group of otherwise matched
> individuals.
>
> I ride a fixed gear a lot and can spin at 150 or so, but I develop my
> maximum sustained power at much lower cadences, probably 50-60.

You know what works best for you but, "The difference between a 52 x 12
and a 55 x 11 is ***only*** around 15%."? Only? I'd be thrilled and
mystified if I suddenly found myself 15% faster, smarter, stronger,
richer, whatever just as I'd be upset and mystified if I became 15%
slower, dumber, weaker, poorer, etcetera.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

 

[Chris BeHanna]

Brian Walker wrote:

> "Chris Neary" <[email protected] > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>>I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>>>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>>>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested going
>>>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.
>>
>>You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?
>
>
> If I have either no wind or a slight tail wind I'm riding about 30mph.
> 25mph - 30mph would be a slight drag from the wind and on flats. It just
> depends on the terrain and the ride. It's when I get over 30mph that I lose
> the push from the gears and end up just maintaining the speed more than
> anything.

Er, my top gear is 52x12, and some simple math tells me that with a
700c wheel, 90rpm at the cranks gives me about 32mph. I'm not strong
enough to push that without someone in front of me (and even then, I'll
be hanging onto that wheel for dear life), but what that tells me is
that you shouldn't be spun out at 52x11 on your bike on the flats,
unless you enjoy turning big gears at slow rpms. Heck, 52x11 should be
good for almost 41mph, if you can spin 105rpm comfortably (I can, but
not at 41mph, unless I'm going downhill!). The hypothetical golden
cadence of 90rpm, at 52x11, translates to just over 35mph, FWIW.

> 18mph - 20mph would be a stronger drag of wind and/or hills. When I get
> that, I just change direction or call for the van...

I usually pick a gear that lets me spin 90-105 rpm at 18-25mph,
depending upon terrain, hills, and wind, on what passes for flats around
here ("flats" around here are usually gently rolling roads with mild
rises in them, 18mph in the big ring on them is usually a bit of a push).

> [...headwind, 13mph, tailwind, 40mph, avg. 18mph, "aero" handlebar
> tape...]



--
Chris BeHanna
'03 Specialized Allez Elite 27
'04 Specialized Hardrock Pro Disc

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Peter Cole]

Bob wrote:
> Peter Cole wrote:
>
>
>>The difference between a 52 x 12 and a 55 x 11 is only around 15%.
>>Surely riders' preferred cadences can vary that amount?
>>
>>I ride a fixed gear a lot and can spin at 150 or so, but I develop my
>>maximum sustained power at much lower cadences, probably 50-60.
>
>
> You know what works best for you but, "The difference between a 52 x 12
> and a 55 x 11 is ***only*** around 15%."? Only? I'd be thrilled and
> mystified if I suddenly found myself 15% faster, smarter, stronger,
> richer, whatever just as I'd be upset and mystified if I became 15%
> slower, dumber, weaker, poorer, etcetera.

A 15% taller gear doesn't make you 15% faster, more likely, it just
lowers your cadence by 15%. Many seem to think that the "best" cadence
is the same for all, but it's not -- nor is it the same for all types of
riding. As for me, I'm 15% taller than average, so a 15% lower cadence
seems natural for just riding around.

One thing I've learned from riding a fixed gear is just how much power
is required to spin legs at high cadences even when not providing any
real power to the wheel. Spinning has an "overhead" -- sometimes it's
offset by a greater advantage, other times not. The other surprising
lesson from riding a fixer is how unimportant gears and cadence really are.

 

[Chris Neary]

>> In any event, your LBS appears to be correct when they pegged you as a "gear
>> masher" but they failed you in not telling you what that meant, including
>> the downsides to both your efficiency and the health of your knees.
>
>Efficiency is actually better at low cadences -- which is why most TT
>riders use them. Larger riders may prefer lower cadences. I have a 55 x
>11 on one bike, 53 x 11 on another, I use those ratios. My knees are
>fine, too.

But how tall is the original poster?


Chris Neary
[email protected]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

 

[Chris Neary]

>One thing I've learned from riding a fixed gear is just how much power
>is required to spin legs at high cadences even when not providing any
>real power to the wheel. Spinning has an "overhead" -- sometimes it's
>offset by a greater advantage, other times not.

When I know my time is limited I often ride the fixed to maximize the
benefit from my workout, so that "overhead" can be an advantage.

>The other surprising lesson from riding a fixer is how unimportant
>gears and cadence really are.

Agreed.


Chris Neary
[email protected]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

 

[Chris Neary]

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <[email protected]> wrote:

>> >I'm running the largest in front of 52 and the smallest rear is 11. I'm
>>>finding that I'm now running out of gearing on flat/straights and I'm
>>>looking for a bit more gearing. My mechanic checked it and suggested going
>>>to a 54 or 55 on the front to get the extra bit I'm needing.
>>
>> You routinely ride at 30+ MPH on the flats?

>
>55/11 is good for a whole lot higher than 30mph.

Ya, I based my calc on 52/11 @ 80 RPM.

>I can still pedal at 44mph if need be (downhill
>sprint, certainly not on the flats!!!).

Thats around where I top out too - downhill - with my 52/12.

Sure beats being dropped by tandems on downhills from when I only had a 13.


Chris Neary
[email protected]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could
you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the elements I
loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh