A
A Muzi
Guest
>>> Ben C napisa (a):
>>>> What's wrong with 12 & 11?
>> Adam Kadlubek wrote:
>>> Simply put - a jump between 12 and 11 is so huge, that 11 is usable
>>> just for spinning downhill, which makes me not bother with it in the
>>> first place.
> jim beam wrote:
>> no, that's not it. there are mechanical meshing issues with # < 13.
>> it'll work, but it's fugly.
Chalo wrote:
> Yes, there is an efficiency and wear penalty for 11t and 12t
> sprockets. There is for 13t sprockets too, for that matter; it just
> seems like a good place to draw the line for diminishing returns.
>
> I use 11-34 freewheels and cassettes for almost all my derailleur
> bikes now. The range they offer makes it easy for me to settle for a
> single ring, which in turn makes it easy to use a strong and cost-
> effective 3-piece BMX crank. I can keep low gears for hill climbing
> and load carrying without unduly truncating top speed. But I've
> switched to 11-34 even on my bikes with front changers. The benefits
> there are a smaller big ring (e.g. 49t) and deeper overlap between
> ranges. For the relative infrequency and modest power levels with
> which I use the small sprocket, I'm not too concerned about excessive
> losses and wear.
>
> Note that BMX/freestyle bikes are increasingly equipped with 9 tooth
> rear drivers on their single-speed cassette hubs. 25/9 is the typical
> gear combination. I recently saw an 8 tooth driver for the first
> time. You can get a 9 tooth driver made from 7075 aluminum! I
> imagine that this fad will pass before too long, but in the meantime,
> manufacturers are going to make a bundle on replacement drivers (which
> are specific to the hub and cost a lot more than freewheels).
Yeah, I wonder why the popular Profile Racing 9t integrated driver is
Ti? - they sure don't last all that long! A steel piece that small just
couldn't be much extra weight. But then again I don't ride them myself...
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>>>> What's wrong with 12 & 11?
>> Adam Kadlubek wrote:
>>> Simply put - a jump between 12 and 11 is so huge, that 11 is usable
>>> just for spinning downhill, which makes me not bother with it in the
>>> first place.
> jim beam wrote:
>> no, that's not it. there are mechanical meshing issues with # < 13.
>> it'll work, but it's fugly.
Chalo wrote:
> Yes, there is an efficiency and wear penalty for 11t and 12t
> sprockets. There is for 13t sprockets too, for that matter; it just
> seems like a good place to draw the line for diminishing returns.
>
> I use 11-34 freewheels and cassettes for almost all my derailleur
> bikes now. The range they offer makes it easy for me to settle for a
> single ring, which in turn makes it easy to use a strong and cost-
> effective 3-piece BMX crank. I can keep low gears for hill climbing
> and load carrying without unduly truncating top speed. But I've
> switched to 11-34 even on my bikes with front changers. The benefits
> there are a smaller big ring (e.g. 49t) and deeper overlap between
> ranges. For the relative infrequency and modest power levels with
> which I use the small sprocket, I'm not too concerned about excessive
> losses and wear.
>
> Note that BMX/freestyle bikes are increasingly equipped with 9 tooth
> rear drivers on their single-speed cassette hubs. 25/9 is the typical
> gear combination. I recently saw an 8 tooth driver for the first
> time. You can get a 9 tooth driver made from 7075 aluminum! I
> imagine that this fad will pass before too long, but in the meantime,
> manufacturers are going to make a bundle on replacement drivers (which
> are specific to the hub and cost a lot more than freewheels).
Yeah, I wonder why the popular Profile Racing 9t integrated driver is
Ti? - they sure don't last all that long! A steel piece that small just
couldn't be much extra weight. But then again I don't ride them myself...
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971