More on SRAM's new road group

Discussion in 'Cycling Equipment' started by D'ohBoy, Apr 6, 2006.

  1. On 6 Apr 2006 16:39:40 -0700, "Ron Ruff" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I'm not racing at the moment, but I used to do fine with a high gear of
    >52/13.


    When? There was a time when everyone did fine with that -- because
    that's all most people had.

    The real question is, in a medium or high-level bike race when a bunch
    of guys have 11s or 12s and you don't, will you do just as well. I
    don't think so. If there is an extended of shallow downhill, or
    tailwinds, or tailwind sprints you're hosed.

    JT

    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************
     


  2. John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
    > On 6 Apr 2006 16:39:40 -0700, "Ron Ruff" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >I'm not racing at the moment, but I used to do fine with a high gear of
    > >52/13.

    >
    > When? There was a time when everyone did fine with that -- because
    > that's all most people had.
    >


    And how long since 11T has been an option? 20 years +/-...


    > The real question is, in a medium or high-level bike race when a bunch
    > of guys have 11s or 12s and you don't, will you do just as well. I
    > don't think so. If there is an extended of shallow downhill, or
    > tailwinds, or tailwind sprints you're hosed.
    >
    >



    Walter! Walter Mitty! You stop spinning out that 53 x 11 and come home
    for dinner!
     
  3. John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
    > On 6 Apr 2006 19:34:27 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >
    > >John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
    > >> On 6 Apr 2006 16:39:40 -0700, "Ron Ruff" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >I'm not racing at the moment, but I used to do fine with a high gear of
    > >> >52/13.
    > >>
    > >> When? There was a time when everyone did fine with that -- because
    > >> that's all most people had.
    > >>

    > >
    > >And how long since 11T has been an option? 20 years +/-...

    >
    > Not common in the US except for the last ten years. Until we had 9
    > speed the trade-off of losing other gears was problematic.
    >


    But it was common elsewhere, Walter?

    > >
    > >
    > >> The real question is, in a medium or high-level bike race when a bunch
    > >> of guys have 11s or 12s and you don't, will you do just as well. I
    > >> don't think so. If there is an extended of shallow downhill, or
    > >> tailwinds, or tailwind sprints you're hosed.

    >
    > >Walter! Walter Mitty! You stop spinning out that 53 x 11 and come home
    > >for dinner!

    >
    > You're such a jackass. I've been in situations where a 12 was vital
    > to not get dropped. That was in pro-1-2 races in the early 1990s --
    > if I was in the same races now an 11 would be essential. For the good
    > guys, those gears were essential to win.
    >
    > An example was the Fitchburg circuit race and criterium
    > where almost
    > every lap most riders had to use their biggest gears for a few
    > seconds. For me that was to not get dropped and hang on -- for the
    > good guys that was to place or win. Three examples of the good guys
    > in that race that you may have heard of are Lance Armstrong, Davis
    > Phinney and Tyler Hamilton. I finished -- nearly last -- but I
    > finished those races when Armstrong won in 92 and in 96 (I think
    > Hamilton won it that year).
    >


    Don't bullshit me , Walter. I used to live just south of Fitchburg
    (Princeton, on the slope of Wachusett, to be exact). You weren't
    exactly famous there, eh?

    > If that's a Walter Mitty moment, so be it


    Yeah, so be it, Wally.
     
  4. On 6 Apr 2006 20:12:40 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
    <[email protected]> wrote:


    >> An example was the Fitchburg circuit race and criterium
    >> where almost
    >> every lap most riders had to use their biggest gears for a few
    >> seconds. For me that was to not get dropped and hang on -- for the
    >> good guys that was to place or win. Three examples of the good guys
    >> in that race that you may have heard of are Lance Armstrong, Davis
    >> Phinney and Tyler Hamilton. I finished -- nearly last -- but I
    >> finished those races when Armstrong won in 92 and in 96 (I think
    >> Hamilton won it that year).
    >>

    >
    >Don't bullshit me , Walter. I used to live just south of Fitchburg
    >(Princeton, on the slope of Wachusett, to be exact). You weren't
    >exactly famous there, eh?


    No I wasn't famous -- as I said I was hanging on just to finish -- at
    the back. And without a 12 I would have been dropped fast -- or
    faster than I was (never finished the circuit race in the field).

    Have you watched that crit in the pro-am race? Watch what gear riders
    are in as they go down the backside the course, past the pits. Or
    watch the circuit race along the top of the course. Every rider goes
    to his biggest gear in both those spots and the field is very very
    strung out. It's the nature of the sport. If you think that's
    bullshit, just watch it someday.

    What's remarkable is that you're such a low-level cyclist that you
    can't even conceive that a hobby cyclist like me could be following
    good guys in big gears at high speed. Must seem like another world to
    you, huh?

    It's not the same as you piddling along in Princeton in you 34x28 or
    whatever gear you use to tool around when your old car with
    "character" is up on blocks.

    JT

    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************
     
  5. On 6 Apr 2006 20:12:40 -0700, "Ozark Bicycle"
    <[email protected]> wrote:


    >
    >Don't bullshit me , Walter. I used to live just south of Fitchburg
    >(Princeton, on the slope of Wachusett, to be exact). You weren't
    >exactly famous there, eh?


    Here you go loser -- me at the back, Tyler Hamiton at the front in
    Fitchburg 1994.

    http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/msg/ba00b7bb30abffb2

    For me, even finishing that thing was an accomplishment. I'm a hobby
    cyclist and that was very hard for me But I did it.. Mock it. You
    coudn't even last a lap in that race. Mock me, please.

    JT

    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************
     
  6. Sandy

    Sandy Guest

    Dans le message de news:p[email protected],
    Matt O'Toole <[email protected]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
    > On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 19:36:26 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 15:30:33 -0400, Doug Taylor
    >> <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>> I believe the 11-26 is intended for compact cranks, and anybody who
    >>> races with compact I think by definition is on a really hilly course
    >>> and/or is a really small female or a really old Master.

    >>
    >> Some mid-level normal size women racers where I live use compact
    >> cranks. And one good not so old master I know - got second in a
    >> stage of GMSR with a compact crank as a 30+ a few years ago but I
    >> think he's 41 now.

    >
    > Plenty of fit/fast racers use the lower gears offered by compacts and
    > triples. The problem with a compact for racing is that it requires
    > too many double shifts in the middle of the "normal" speed range. I
    > actually prefer my triple because its 42T middle ring covers my
    > normal speed range without as many double shifts as the usual double
    > with a 39T. Also the gap is narrower, making front shifts almost as
    > seamless as rear ones.
    >
    > Matt O.


    You confused racing with riding. In most racing, with conventional gears,
    you are in the big ring and the rear range is typically from 14 to 17.
    Change a 53 to a 50, and you go from 13 to 16. There is no middle normal
    speed involved. Also, having a larger gap between big and small rings just
    puts your cross gears 1-2 gears farther apart. While that may make the
    transition a touch slower, it doesn't happen all that frequently. Finally,
    if it's a climb of a decent length, you are in the small ring anyway.

    For plain riding, training, you may have a point, and in the one week I used
    a compact, I found the warm-up time was the most confusing, keeping it in
    the small ring and little rear gears for what seemed much too long. I
    haven't seen many triples racing, even in my age group (ancient).
    --
    Bonne route !

    Sandy
    Verneuil-sur-Seine FR
     
  7. Andrew F Martin wrote:

    > I'm very in-patiently awaiting my new rain bike so I can get back to
    > consistent shifting methods. It seems stupid, but when you ride Ergo
    > all winter, then swap over to STI for the race bike - it's not an
    > automatic transition. Then I go and ride the rain bike during the week
    > - my hands sometimes get confused as to what they are doing.


    I occasionally get this problem - my race and 'cross bikes have
    Ergopower, but my training bike has down-tube gear levers. There have
    been one or two instances where I've found myself reaching for a
    down-shift button on the brake hood that doesn't actually exist. D'oh!

    David Belcher
     
  8. Lou Holtman

    Lou Holtman Guest

    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Andrew F Martin wrote:
    >
    > > I'm very in-patiently awaiting my new rain bike so I can get back to
    > > consistent shifting methods. It seems stupid, but when you ride Ergo
    > > all winter, then swap over to STI for the race bike - it's not an
    > > automatic transition. Then I go and ride the rain bike during the week
    > > - my hands sometimes get confused as to what they are doing.

    >
    > I occasionally get this problem - my race and 'cross bikes have
    > Ergopower, but my training bike has down-tube gear levers. There have
    > been one or two instances where I've found myself reaching for a
    > down-shift button on the brake hood that doesn't actually exist. D'oh!
    >
    > David Belcher



    In the winter I use my singlespeed on the road. Now I'm back on my roadbike
    with Ergo's I forget to shift.......Geez.

    Lou
     
  9. Andrew F Martin wrote:
    > Doug Taylor wrote:
    > > On 6 Apr 2006 05:23:28 -0700, "D'ohBoy" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > >http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech.php?id=tech/2006/features/sram_road_launch

    > >
    > > As a compact ring advocate, I'm happy to see the following compact
    > > friendly features:
    > >
    > > a) choice of 50/34 or 50/36;
    > > b) front der. works for traditional and compact rings;
    > > c) 11-26 cassette.
    > >
    > > And, whether you buy the whole group or not, 10 speed Shimano users
    > > can now buy a good chain with a powerlink. Yay.

    >
    > 10sp Powerlink chain for DA is a big plus. Not sure on the cassette
    > spacing, but a 11-26 is an interesting option for some hilly Road
    > Races.
    >
    > Anybody hear any price points? I imagine it'll be a little less than
    > DA to gain a solid user base?


    'Heard' that it will be OEM only until mid 2007 or so....tough to find
    any 'group' prices. With a 5.9mm chain, it's gonna be pretty close in
    spacing to Campag/shimano-has to be.
     
  10. Doug Taylor

    Doug Taylor Guest

    On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 18:30:30 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 17:32:25 -0400, Matt O'Toole
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>There aren't too many riders, even Cat II racers, who can spin out a 50/12.

    >
    >On the flat, in still air? No. But that's not the point of big gears.
    >Shallow downhills, tailwinds, closing gaps when tired, etc. Necesarry
    >to stay in the field at certain points.


    Yes, we're not talking about "spinning out," but "spinning furiously"
    even if you're only on a fast club ride, let alone a race. If
    everybody else in your group is hammering on a shallow downhill in
    53/12, if your big ring is 50, you better have an 11 to keep the high
    gears equal, or, as JFT says, you're soon toast trying to stay on.

    Which is why manufacturers are only recently selling cassettes (9 and
    10 speed) with a gear range that starts at 11 and ends in a 26 (SRAM)
    or 28 (IRD, Nashbar, Sheldon Brown) - aimed I believe for the compact
    ring cyclists (when will Shimano catch on?).

    Prior to compact, wasn't is pretty much the case that if you wanted an
    11, your block was more or less straight and ended in 21 (or 23)?
    These wide range blocks @ 11 to 26, 27 or 28 necessarily have two
    tooth jumps here and there, in the middle and at the end, which as a
    club rider I have no problem with. I want to keep my high gear
    otherwise lost if you switch to compact rings and use a cassette that
    starts @ 12 teeth. But I also want those big teeth in the back to
    make my low gears super low to preserve 55 year old quadriceps on
    steep climbs. I will "put up with" the jumpy block to achieve the
    high on the one end and the lows on the other, which is the whole
    point of compact anyway.
     
  11. Mark Hickey

    Mark Hickey Guest

    Doug Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Yes, we're not talking about "spinning out," but "spinning furiously"
    >even if you're only on a fast club ride, let alone a race. If
    >everybody else in your group is hammering on a shallow downhill in
    >53/12, if your big ring is 50, you better have an 11 to keep the high
    >gears equal, or, as JFT says, you're soon toast trying to stay on.


    I guess it all depends on your definition of "spinning furiously"...
    most fast recreational cyclists have no trouble spinning 120-130 rpm
    (I certainly wouldn't consider THAT "spinning furiously"... I'd leave
    that for the 160+rpm range - maybe higher).

    In the case of a cyclist "limited" by a mere 50/12 drive train, he or
    she would be going 40mph at 120rpm. Change that to a more common 53
    tooth ring and the speed's up to 42.5mph (certainly enough to keep you
    in contact with 99.9% of the "fast club rides" I've been on).

    Change the small cog to an 11, and the only difference is the cadence
    drops from 120 to 110. Not really a big deal, IMHO.

    Mark Hickey
    Habanero Cycles
    http://www.habcycles.com
    Home of the $795 ti frame
     
  12. On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 11:23:47 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
    wrote:


    >Change the small cog to an 11, and the only difference is the cadence
    >drops from 120 to 110. Not really a big deal, IMHO.


    If you're hurting and you get dropped, it's a big deal, if you're not
    hurting and manage it, it is. It's nto complicated.

    I can ride for many tens of minutes at stupidly high cadences when I'm
    fresh. When I'm in a lot of pain it's a different story.

    JT

    ****************************
    Remove "remove" to reply
    Visit http://www.jt10000.com
    ****************************
     
  13. Ron Ruff

    Ron Ruff Guest

    John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
    > When? There was a time when everyone did fine with that -- because
    > that's all most people had.
    >


    1993... Cat3. There aren't a lot of Cat1s in the country you know... or
    even a lot of racers.

    At the moment I have a high gear of 48/13... and it is high enough. I
    prefer close ratios and being able to stay in the big ring longer, to
    having higher gears that I don't need. If I'm spun out in that gear, I
    can go faster by tucking and coasting. True, if I was racing I might be
    in situations where higher gearing would be nice... but I think a 48/11
    would be more than sufficient.
     
  14. Doug Taylor

    Doug Taylor Guest

    On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 16:48:42 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 11:23:47 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]>
    >wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Change the small cog to an 11, and the only difference is the cadence
    >>drops from 120 to 110. Not really a big deal, IMHO.

    >
    >If you're hurting and you get dropped, it's a big deal, if you're not
    >hurting and manage it, it is. It's nto complicated.
    >
    >I can ride for many tens of minutes at stupidly high cadences when I'm
    >fresh. When I'm in a lot of pain it's a different story.


    Which is why IRD, Nashbar, Harris Cyclery, and now SRAM sell "big
    range" 11- 26 or 11-28 cassettes in various 9 and 10 speed
    configurations. There is a market for them now because of the number
    riders using compact - many of whom ride with people using the common
    53-12, and don't want to use their high gear.

    When I first started using compact 10 speed two seasons ago, I had to
    buy two Shimano cassettes on e-bay, one 11-21 and one 12-27, and cob
    together the 11-27 I wanted.

    I now can buy an IRD 11-28 or a SRAM 11-26 ready made. Progress.


    I now have the choice of
     
  15. Mark Janeba

    Mark Janeba Guest

    Andrew F Martin wrote:
    > I'm very in-patiently awaiting my new rain bike so I can get back to
    > consistent shifting methods. It seems stupid, but when you ride Ergo
    > all winter, then swap over to STI for the race bike - it's not an
    > automatic transition. Then I go and ride the rain bike during the week
    > - my hands sometimes get confused as to what they are doing.


    Even worse when you are swapping between bar-end shift levers and Ergo!
    I fing myself reaching for the non-existant lever (both types) around
    this time of year as I swap from bike to bike.

    Mark
     
  16. Exactly - I'm very much looking forward to a 11-26 when it ships. I
    can think of a number of races that'll be real nice to have that on.
     
  17. Doug Taylor

    Doug Taylor Guest

    On 8 Apr 2006 20:35:08 -0700, "Andrew F Martin"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Exactly - I'm very much looking forward to a 11-26 when it ships. I
    >can think of a number of races that'll be real nice to have that on.


    Yes, and if you don't want an 11 for your compact and like to spin,
    then by all means stick with your current 12-25 cassette. What I am
    appreciating here is the availability, FINALLY, of a SRAM 10 speed
    chain and compact friendly cassette so I don't have all the problems
    of mixing and matching components I have had the past 2 seasons, and
    will be able to go back to the SRAM and Powerlink as I preferred with
    9 speed.

    Although I must say in all fairness that the new kid on the block,
    IRD, sells a Shimano compatible 10 speed chain and snaplink similar to
    SRAM, plus an 11-28 cassette, and both are performing flawlessly for
    me early in the season. I have heard complaints about reliability and
    durability of IRD products, but have had no problems so far.
     
  18. Jeff

    Jeff Guest

    too bad they didn't add a 13-26 10-speed to the line-up-- that combo
    work nicely for sport touring/cyclo-X bikes where 11 or 12 tooth
    sprockets aren't needed when one uses something beyond the size of
    700Cx30 tire
     
  19. Doug Taylor

    Doug Taylor Guest

    On 9 Apr 2006 17:32:01 -0500, [email protected] (Jeff) wrote:

    >too bad they didn't add a 13-26 10-speed to the line-up-- that combo
    >work nicely for sport touring/cyclo-X bikes where 11 or 12 tooth
    >sprockets aren't needed when one uses something beyond the size of
    >700Cx30 tire


    SRAM is just getting into 10 speed and maybe your cassette will be
    available later. But, you already can get an Ultegra 13-25 for 10
    speed. Until SRAM announced the 11-26, the only other "wide range" 10
    speed cassette on the market (staring with an 11) was the IRD.
     
  20. Doug Taylor

    Doug Taylor Guest

Loading...
Loading...