Which chainset

S said:

At the moment I have a new 2006 Giant xtc se mtb and want to use it mainly
on road, for training purposes, so have changed the tyres to continental
gator duraskins and now was wondering about changing the chainset which at
the moment is truvativ something or other, it doesn't actually say what
model they are. Does anyone have any recomendations for any chainset that
will not only be strong but fairly light. It seems to me that there are too
many to choose from, so anyone with experience of any would be welcome.

Why do you want to change your chainset? Without that, we can't really help.

Also, if you really want to convert your Giant for road use and make it lighter,
get a rigid fork. Or maybe a second hand road bike?

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune

"Arthur Clune" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

S said:

At the moment I have a new 2006 Giant xtc se mtb and want to use it
mainly
on road, for training purposes, so have changed the tyres to continental
gator duraskins and now was wondering about changing the chainset which
at
the moment is truvativ something or other, it doesn't actually say what
model they are. Does anyone have any recomendations for any chainset
that
will not only be strong but fairly light. It seems to me that there are
too
many to choose from, so anyone with experience of any would be welcome.

Why do you want to change your chainset? Without that, we can't really
help.

Also, if you really want to convert your Giant for road use and make it
lighter,
get a rigid fork. Or maybe a second hand road bike?

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune

Thanks for your imput Authur,
I did have a road bike, light as well, but due to my back, I have since
found that riding an mtb is more comfortable. Reason I want to change the
chainset is that the one on at the mo is heavy and the cranks arn't to my
style etc, so I thought i'de have a look at changing them to something
lighter and more to my liking. Someone has now suggested moving up to a
better set of Truvativ's but I have no knoledge of these or any mtb
chainsets come to that. I am also pondering the idea of also changing the
front and rear mechs also, so any info on these would also be welcome.

As for a rigid fork, that has also crossed my mind, but again which one?
Can you get one that will also be able to take brake disks, as I have found
them to be a lot better than the more traditional v brake.
<<S>>

in message said:

At the moment I have a new 2006 Giant xtc se mtb and want to use it
mainly on road, for training purposes,

Look: no, you don't. It's /completely/ unsuitable. This idea that the
only difference between mountain bikes and road bikes is the tyres is
just total nonsense. Once you've changed the tyres and the chainset, you
also need to change:

1: the frame
because the bottom bracket is too high, making it harder for you to get
a foot down when you stop at lights (or, if you lower your seat so you
can get your foot down you don't have enough leg extension for
pedalling efficiency), and because the head angle is much too slack;

2: the forks
because they have much too much travel, leading to pedal bob, are
inadequately stiff, leading to steering vagueness, and/or are much too
heavy;

3: the handlebars
because they're much too wide, lowering your aerodynamic efficiency and
critically increasing the risk of their being hit by passing traffic or
being snagged by roadside obstructions;

4: the wheels
because bearings which are designed to resist mud ingress do not run as
freely as those which are not;

5: the front derailleur
because it won't fit your new chainset.

So at the end of that, what are you left with? The brakes, which are
probably a lot heavier than good road bike brakes without any more
useful performance under road conditions, and a range of gears you're
never going to use.

Don't get me wrong. Mountain bikes - including the Giant XTC series - are
brilliant vehicles. They can go places a landrover can't. But in order
to be able to do that, they are highly specialised machines, and every
one of their specialisations is in completely the opposite direction
from improving tarmac performance and commuter safety. You would not
drive a Unimog or a Swamp Cat down a city street; why do you think a
mountain bike will be suitable?

Sell it, and get something built for the job.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

'Victories are not solutions.'
;; John Hume, Northern Irish politician, on Radio Scotland 1/2/95
;; Nobel Peace Prize laureate 1998; few have deserved it so much

Simon Brooke said:

in message said:

At the moment I have a new 2006 Giant xtc se mtb and want to use it
mainly on road, for training purposes,

Look: no, you don't. It's /completely/ unsuitable.

Are you looking for a second hand Giant, Simon ;-) Touch of hyperbole
in your response.

He has a bike. He knows what he wants to do with it. It may not be the
most efficient on road but it will do the job just fine...

Quoted message said:

This idea that the
only difference between mountain bikes and road bikes is the tyres is
just total nonsense.

I don't believe he claimed that. However the difference between riding
*that bike* comfortably on the road vs off road is essentially tyres
and chainset.

Quoted message said:

Once you've changed the tyres and the chainset, you
also need to change:

1: the frame
because the bottom bracket is too high, making it harder for you to get
a foot down when you stop at lights (or, if you lower your seat so you
can get your foot down you don't have enough leg extension for
pedalling efficiency), and because the head angle is much too slack;

High BB allows the corners to be taken whilst pedalling. Much nicer.
And with a set of narrow (relatively) road tyres on teh bike, it will
be nigh on an inch lower anyway. Height of bottom bracket is a minimal
thing if you get off the saddle when you stop anyway.

Quoted message said:

2: the forks
because they have much too much travel, leading to pedal bob, are
inadequately stiff, leading to steering vagueness, and/or are much too
heavy;

Roads are generally less of a gradient than off road, so weight is less
of a factor. Pedal bob? yes at first but you then discover a much
smoother pedalling style and the bob goes away. It took a while before
I could ride my front sus MTB no hands.

Quoted message said:

3: the handlebars
because they're much too wide, lowering your aerodynamic efficiency and
critically increasing the risk of their being hit by passing traffic or
being snagged by roadside obstructions;

Is he racing? Aerodynamics don't really come into it too much if he
isn't. And comfort is in the eye of the beholder (well, not the eye
exactly). With my bars, they are still about my shoulder width and
anything that close to hit the bars and not me is rare.

Quoted message said:

4: the wheels
because bearings which are designed to resist mud ingress do not run as
freely as those which are not;

Not IME. Good hubs are good hubs whether in use on or off road.

Quoted message said:

5: the front derailleur
because it won't fit your new chainset.

Marginal problem I have not had any issue with going up to a 48t
chainring with mine. (currently deore, previously Altus).

Quoted message said:

So at the end of that, what are you left with? The brakes, which are
probably a lot heavier than good road bike brakes without any more
useful performance under road conditions, and a range of gears you're
never going to use.

Quoted message said:

Don't get me wrong. Mountain bikes - including the Giant XTC series - are
brilliant vehicles. They can go places a landrover can't. But in order
to be able to do that, they are highly specialised machines, and every
one of their specialisations is in completely the opposite direction
from improving tarmac performance and commuter safety. You would not
drive a Unimog or a Swamp Cat down a city street; why do you think a
mountain bike will be suitable?

But you would drive a landrover with suitable tyres down a city street.
That's what he is wanting to do. Do you go and buy a Nissan Micra if
you have a Landrover becasue it will be more efficient, or do you make
do with what you have.

Quoted message said:

Sell it, and get something built for the job.

Enjoy it on and off road. Then decide to get a more specialised road
bike and keep the MTB for playing off road. It can be just as much fun
on as off road, unless you fall in with a bunch of roadies.

...d

S said:

As for a rigid fork, that has also crossed my mind, but again which one?
Can you get one that will also be able to take brake disks, as I have found
them to be a lot better than the more traditional v brake.

Yes. Pace do some nice (and expensive) carbon ones if you want bling.

My point, which I stated badly, is why spend 150 quid+ on a new chainset
to save a couple of hundred grams tops when you could take a kilo off the
bike easily?

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune

Simon Brooke said:

1: the frame
because the bottom bracket is too high, making it harder for you to get
a foot down when you stop at lights (or, if you lower your seat so you
can get your foot down you don't have enough leg extension for
pedalling efficiency), and because the head angle is much too slack;

I don't normally disagree with Simon, but this is one case.

I can't reach the ground when sat on the saddle on any of my bikes -
road, MTB or commuter. This is fine and a good thing.

Quoted message said:

3: the handlebars
because they're much too wide, lowering your aerodynamic efficiency and
critically increasing the risk of their being hit by passing traffic or
being snagged by roadside obstructions;

eh? What happened to the theory of big here?

I like nice wide flat bars for commuting - lots of leverage for towing
trailers, nice upright position to see over the cars (*) easy access
to the brakes etc.

Arthur

(*) actually, that's relative. My bars are about where the hoods
are on my road bike, so actually pretty low by most people's standards.

--
Arthur Clune

Quoted message said:

My point, which I stated badly, is why spend 150 quid+ on a new chainset
to save a couple of hundred grams tops when you could take a kilo off the
bike easily?

B'ah, pathetic advice - you can knock off 80kg from the weight of the bike
simply by pushing it!

I'm sure there's a Sheldon -esque product there somewhere - think what the
roadies would pay for something that takes 80kg off a sub-10kg bike.

S said:

As for a rigid fork, that has also crossed my mind, but again which one?
Can you get one that will also be able to take brake disks, as I have found
them to be a lot better than the more traditional v brake.

The Kona Project 2 (which is, I understand, a pretty good rigid MTB
fork for its price bracket) is now available in disc-brake format;
wiggle have them at around forty quid a throw.

David Belcher

David E. Belcher said:

The Kona Project 2 (which is, I understand, a pretty good rigid MTB
fork for its price bracket) is now available in disc-brake format;
wiggle have them at around forty quid a throw.

That would be ideal for this.

--
Arthur Clune

"David E. Belcher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

S said:

As for a rigid fork, that has also crossed my mind, but again which one?
Can you get one that will also be able to take brake disks, as I have
found
them to be a lot better than the more traditional v brake.

The Kona Project 2 (which is, I understand, a pretty good rigid MTB
fork for its price bracket) is now available in disc-brake format;
wiggle have them at around forty quid a throw.

David Belcher

Thanks for that david, will have a look.
<<S>>