Why is road biking so hard?

[Peter Rollason]

Might seem like a daft suggestion - but why not find an easier route ? - Try finding some flat fast
road - this will make your cycling more enjoyable, improve your motivation , hence will bring about
an increase in performance.

You also haven't stated what your mileage - on average I would say you need a base of about 1000
miles - after this you should have some 'legs' -

Another good one is to stay in the saddle on hills, very hard at first, but it gets easier when you
get the knack .

Pete.

>
> You can go with a triple but now you are talking about a lot more money (hundred of dollars) and a
> lot more work to swap back.
>
> With the short cage Ultegra rear derailleur you should be able to accomodate up to a 28 tooth
> cassette cog (I have a short cage Dura-Ace that will). If you want to put a mountain bike rear
> derailleur on (an XT or LX) you can go all the way to a 34 tooth cog.
>
> Speaking from my own experience, Tom

 

[Captain Dondo]

Basic questions about riding style:

What's your cadence? (I.e. how fast do you turn the pedals?)

Knee pain is either due to poor position - seat too high - or pushing too big a gear.

I typically ride with a 53/39 and a 12/24 rear (I think - it's been a while since I looked.) That's
enough to get me up most places, but for real hills I'll put a triple on and even put a mountain
bike rear deralleur on with a 12/28 rear.

Your cadence should be over 100 RPM in most conditions; you should feel no pain during most riding.

Most people that I've seen who complain about road riding being "too hard" simply push ****way too
big*** a gear, griding along at 40 or 50 RPM. Your knees will blow out in short order.

You should feel almost no effort in pedaling. Grimacing, stomping, knotted mucles all indicate too
big a gear.

So before you spend any money, check you position, your cadence, and see if that fixes the problem.

The best thing to do is to find a relatively flat course, about 10 miles long (or whatver you can
ride comfortably), stick the front derailleur in the small ring, put the rear derailleur in the
middle somewhere, and ride. ***Don't*** shift into bigger gears; just spin your legs faster. See if
the knee pain persists. Learn to spin.

When you get to a hill, downshift (easier gear) and keep the RPMs up. Think like a sports car;
higher RPM == more power, more fun. Don't think like a Mack Truck; low RPM == smoke belching from
blown knees, roaring engine == you puffing and huffing in pain.

And remember, ultimately, there is no painless gear.

-Dondo

 

[Bfd]

"Robin Hubert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "ajames54" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On 17 Feb 2003 19:33:58 -0800, [email protected] (Steve B) wrote:
> >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >I am a newbie to road biking, from mountain biking. I JUST bought a used LeMond Zurich on
> > >Thursday, and have been on two rides. I LOVE
> > >it.
> > >
> > >Here's the problem/question...
> > >
> > >**Why is road biking so hard, and how do I make it easier?**
> Snip...
> > >Any ideas?
> > >
> > >Thanks!
> >
> >
> > There is one thing I always try to impress on mountain bikers who are transitioning to road ...
> > SPIN ... in most cases Mountain Bikers are prone to push a higher gear at a lower cadence that
> > would a roadie. This makes hills higher that they need to be. Before you start buying more kit,
> > try training yourself to drop a gear and increase your cadence.
> >
> > When you hit a hill don't wait until your muscles tell you it is time to drop a gear ... drop
> > the gear and increase your cadence a bit... as your cadence drops, drop another gear. Eventually
> > you will get to a point where you can go up and down hills (and through the gears) without
> > changing your cadence more than about 5 rpm.
>
> Why complicate things for the poor fella? Cadence features on computers are just a distraction and
> no-one needs them. BTW, what's Jobst's hill-climbing cadence? I even wonder if he knows ....
>
According to his tour of the alps summary, Jobst uses a use 180mm cranks with 47-50 and 13-24 for
gears (6 spd I believe), for more see here:
http://www-math.science.unitn.it/Bike/Countries/Europe/Tour_Reports/Tour_of_the_Alps/1990/

Not exactly the type of gearing a newbie should be starting at...
> >
> > It is tough to retrain yourself you may want to get a computer with cadence ... others would
> > probably pick a different target but I usually suggest aiming for 80 rpm ( but since I have
> > never ridden with you and never seen you I could be way off).
>
> And how do you "know" what the best cadence is, for anyone but yourself?
>
True, but at least a 39x26/27/28 wouldn't be a bad start for a newbie. What most mfrs and "product
managers" don't seem to understand is that a 53t big chainring, while probably useful to most
racers, is virtually useless to the majority of riders. IF these product managers were actually
concerned about helping newbies learn to "enjoy" riding, they would spec new bikes
accordingly...maybe something like 50/39 (or lower if the leading mfrs would also learn to make a
110bcd crank) with a 13x26/27/28 or larger rear. As I stated 39x26 or larger should get most people
up even the most difficult of hills...

 

[Robert Strickla]

> I'm not so sure you needed the XT derailleur. I really can't spin out the 12 much anymore and have
> mostly 13t small rings. I think if I could turn over the 11, I could turn over something smaller
> than a 30 with the 39 to go uphill.
>
> My recent diversion to 46x34 rings and 12/25 cassettes has been nothing but favorable. My usual
> 53/39 and 13/26 is used almost all the time but on mountainous, long rides, I needed more.

Actually, I used some old cogs and set the cassette up so its a 13-30 but I didn't mention that part
since it didn't have much to do with the original question.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"D.Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> I think a new cassette and derailleur would cost almost
the same as a triple
> crankset.

Sixty bucks for the former, a lot more than that for the latter -- figuring in a new crank, and
probably front derailer and brifter. If, heaven forbid, you have to pay bike shop retail and then
labor for all this stuff, you could almost buy a new bike!

> Since the bike is almost new (?) he could work out some
kind of
> exchange with the shop.

Wouldn't it be great if most shops would do that...

I'm all for the triple, but for most newer bikes a new cassette and derailer would be easier
and cheaper.

Matt O.

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"Paul Kopit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> My recent diversion to 46x34 rings and 12/25 cassettes has
been
> nothing but favorable. My usual 53/39 and 13/26 is used
almost all
> the time but on mountainous, long rides, I needed more.

I like those "2x9" cranks a lot -- they seem a great solution for many people. The question is, how
well do they work with a normal STI double derailer and shifter (Sora/Tiagra/105/Ultegra/etc)?

Matt O.

 

[Paul Southworth]

In article <[email protected]>, Matt O'Toole
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"D.Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
>> I think a new cassette and derailleur would cost almost
>the same as a triple
>> crankset.
>
>Sixty bucks for the former, a lot more than that for the latter -- figuring in a new crank, and
>probably front derailer and brifter. If, heaven forbid, you have to pay bike shop retail and then
>labor for all this stuff, you could almost buy a new bike!

Are you talking Canadian money here? If you're not paying "bike shop retail" then cassettes are
available far below $60. At one of the obvious online discounters the HG70 is $37 and the Ultegra
cassette is $40. I paid $50 for an Ultegra 12-27 in a high-priced LA snooty pro-shop just a few
months ago. Deore LX rear derailleur would be just fine, about $30 from the online discounters.

I agree labor savings can really add up, a lot faster than the price of tools.

OK I think I've set this thread up for a good flamefest. So long...

--Paul

 

[Benjamin Weiner]

> "Doug Huffman" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > What you do with what you have is more important than what you have. Work with the bike you have
> > until it is easy. By then you will have enough experience to move to the next step in your
> > evolution as a cyclist and not as a conspicuous consumer.

"ari" <[email protected]> wrote:
> can someone help me out, I lost the decoder ring needed to read cryptic posts.

I think it sounds better in the original Yoda-ese:

Hard going up hills is. For the cyclist true, painless is not. Seek not low effort gear, rather
seek within yourself power. It doesn't get any easier, you just go faster.

Oh no wait, it was Greg Lemond, not Yoda, who said that last sentence.

Really, I don't think the quest for moderately low gearing is the topic on which to accuse someone
of conspicuous consumption. It doesn't have to be that expensive either, as many people have pointed
out (mountain cassette, derailleur, chain). My experience is that once you get the low gear so you
can climb without suffering, you climb more, and that makes you stronger. Then maybe you can
dispense with the low gear - or find steeper hills.

 

[Raptor]

Get in shape and lose some pounds is what I'd go for.

I bought a new Lemond Tourmalet last Spring after a decade of mtb only.
I took it easy at first, but like you, I loved road biking (again).

When I finally got "the tank" out again, I found I was spinning gears 2-3 stops higher than I had
been. I was almost topping out the gears on level ground. My trail riding was also stronger.

Of course, my road bike has a triple, which I've had to use at times on the local canyon roads. But
I only use it on the real hard stuff.

I'd suggest staying with the double, but maybe putting a larger cluster on to give you a more
turnable low gear. A 39-23 or 25 should be low enough for any reasonably fit road rider, unless
you're on the Angliru. "Back in the day," 42-21 was considered low enough.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

 

[Steve B]

Jim, you hit the nail on the head! Turns out, the rear casette is a 9 speed, 11-23. Based on what
I've read, seems like this might be the problem, or a problem as the case may be...

Will a 12-27 be better? Much better? Will a Sheldon Century Special be even better?

If I change the rear casette, will it be expensive? Can I remove the 11 and 12 rings and add a 25
and 27 ring? Can I do this myself?

Also, my right knee hurts on the front, kind of a sharp, this-is-not-good acute pain. Sounds like I
need to raise the seat a little and get a proper fitting. I think the bike fits well. I'm 6'2", 190,
and the frame is a 59. I'm stretched out over the bars, and my legs extend to about a 170-175 deg
full extension.

I definitely need ot get some legs. My two rides have been about 20-25 miles, with steep uphills, as
I mentioned. And I have been climbing oput of the saddle.

So, again, thanks, and any tips on changing the rear casette will be appreciated!!!

Also, anyone know the best route from San Francisco to Santa Cruz? How is this ride?

 

[David L. Johnso]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 14:24:33 -0500, Peter Rollason wrote:

> Might seem like a daft suggestion - but why not find an easier route ? - Try finding some flat
> fast road - this will make your cycling more enjoyable, improve your motivation , hence will bring
> about an increase in performance.

OP is in Berkeley, California. Nestled against the Berkeley Hills. There are flat roads, but they
are unpleasant riding, with lots of lights and traffic. The only rural routes near there are indeed
challenging hills. But once you get into the hills, the riding is great.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | It is a scientifically proven fact that a mid life crisis can _`\(,_ | only be cured by
something racy and Italian. Bianchis and (_)/ (_) | Colnagos are a lot cheaper than Maserattis
and Ferraris. -- Glenn Davies

 

[Matt O'Toole]

"Paul Southworth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:fLx4a.32692$A%[email protected]...
> In article
<[email protected]>,
> Matt O'Toole <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >"D.Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> >> I think a new cassette and derailleur would cost almost
> >the same as a triple
> >> crankset.
> >
> >Sixty bucks for the former, a lot more than that for the latter -- figuring in a new crank, and
> >probably front derailer and brifter. If, heaven forbid, you have to pay bike shop retail and then
> >labor for all this stuff, you could almost buy a new bike!
>
> Are you talking Canadian money here? If you're not paying
"bike
> shop retail" then cassettes are available far below $60.
At one
> of the obvious online discounters the HG70 is $37 and the
Ultegra
> cassette is $40. I paid $50 for an Ultegra 12-27 in a
high-priced
> LA snooty pro-shop just a few months ago. Deore LX rear
derailleur
> would be just fine, about $30 from the online discounters.
>
> I agree labor savings can really add up, a lot faster than
the price
> of tools.
>
> OK I think I've set this thread up for a good flamefest.
So long...

I was thinking $60 for both cassette and derailer -- around $30 each, give or take a few bucks.

Matt O.

 

[Mark Hickey]

[email protected] (Steve B) wrote:

>Here's the problem/question...
>
>**Why is road biking so hard, and how do I make it easier?**

Greg LeMond answered that question best...

"It doesn't GET any easier - you just go faster".

Lots of good advice in the thread - I'd second the triple option.

Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame

 

[Eric Murray]

In article <[email protected]>, Steve B <[email protected]> wrote:
>Jim, you hit the nail on the head! Turns out, the rear casette is a 9 speed, 11-23. Based on what
>I've read, seems like this might be the problem, or a problem as the case may be...
>
>Will a 12-27 be better?

Yes.

>Much better?

Yes.

>Will a Sheldon Century Special be even better?

If you are reasonably fit sport cyclist then the 27 ought to do you. You also may need a different
rear derailleur to go to a 30t cog.

Make sure that the chain is long enough when you shift into the big-big combination-- you're not
supposed to use that, but it's worth a couple extra chain links to be able to accidentally shift
into it without breaking things.

>If I change the rear casette, will it be expensive? Can I remove the 11 and 12 rings and add a 25
>and 27 ring? Can I do this myself?

Shimano clusters are generally sold as a unit. A 12-27 Ultegra will cost $40-50 depending on where
you get it.

>Also, my right knee hurts on the front, kind of a sharp, this-is-not-good acute pain. Sounds like I
>need to raise the seat a little and get a proper fitting. I think the bike fits well. I'm 6'2",
>190, and the frame is a 59. I'm stretched out over the bars, and my legs extend to about a 170-175
>deg full extension.

59 sounds potentially a bit small for 6'2-- I'm 6'0 and a 59c-c is what I use and I have a fair
bit of seatpost showing. But it depends on the inseam (mine's 35.5" using the
book-in-the-crotch method).

The LeMond formula for seat height
(http://www.cyclemetrics.com/Pages/Docs/6-BikeFitting/LemondSystem/fit_formulas.htm) is a good
starting point. I prefer a couple cm higher.

A proper fitting is a good idea, but don't be afraid to change things. Just keep notes so you
can get back.

>I definitely need ot get some legs. My two rides have been about 20-25 miles, with steep uphills,
>as I mentioned. And I have been climbing oput of the saddle.

Lower gears will make your knees less unhappy.

>So, again, thanks, and any tips on changing the rear casette will be appreciated!!!

You need a Shimano cluster remover gizmo, a chain whip, and a square drive ratchet or breaker bar
(1/2" for the cluster remover I have). A torque wrench for tightening the nut-thing is useful,
depending on how mechanically skilled you are (its not that hard, tighten it so its as tight as it
was when you took it off).

The nut-thing has internal splines that the remover gizmo fits into after you take the quick-release
skewer out. The chain whip keeps the cluster fro freewheeling while you unscrew the nut-thing. There
will be some cogs that are riveted togeher and some that are single cogs with thin spacers in
between. Keep them in order. The cogs are all splined with a master spline so they go on only one
way, to keep the shifting ramps aligned.

>Also, anyone know the best route from San Francisco to Santa Cruz? How is this ride?

Long and hilly.

 

[Robin Hubert]

ajames54 <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 16:00:41 GMT, "Robin Hubert" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Why complicate things for the poor fella? Cadence features on computers are just a distraction
> >and no-one needs them. BTW, what's Jobst's hill-climbing cadence? I even wonder if he knows ....
> >
> Sure forget technique...just throw more money at the issue... so what if it never gets any
> better... you sound like the perfect target for all the bike mags...
> >
> >And how do you "know" what the best cadence is, for anyone but yourself?
> >
> > Robin Hubert
>
> Gee ...did I say I knew? ... NO? in fact I simply suggested a target and even then I suggested I
> might be way off. If you don't care to listen then fine, I don't really give a rats...

Nyah-nyah-nyah!

Robin

 

[Paul Kopit]

You can remove the 11 and add any Shimano cassette, 26t cog. I don't think a loose 27 is available.

It would be less costly to buy a 12/27 than make one starting with an
11/23.

On 18 Feb 2003 16:14:45 -0800, [email protected] (Steve B) wrote:

>If I change the rear casette, will it be expensive? Can I remove the 11 and 12 rings and add a 25
>and 27 ring? Can I do this myself?

 

[Robin Hubert]

"bfd" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Robin Hubert" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > "ajames54" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > On 17 Feb 2003 19:33:58 -0800, [email protected] (Steve B) wrote:
> > >
> > > >Hi,
> > > >
> > > >I am a newbie to road biking, from mountain biking. I JUST bought a used LeMond Zurich on
> > > >Thursday, and have been on two rides. I LOVE
> > > >it.
> > > >
> > > >Here's the problem/question...
> > > >
> > > >**Why is road biking so hard, and how do I make it easier?**
> > Snip...
> > > >Any ideas?
> > > >
> > > >Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > > There is one thing I always try to impress on mountain bikers who are transitioning to road
> > > ... SPIN ... in most cases Mountain Bikers are prone to push a higher gear at a lower cadence
> > > that would a roadie. This makes hills higher that they need to be. Before you start buying
> > > more kit, try training yourself to drop a gear and increase your cadence.
> > >
> > > When you hit a hill don't wait until your muscles tell you it is time to drop a gear ... drop
> > > the gear and increase your cadence a bit... as your cadence drops, drop another gear.
> > > Eventually you will get to a point where you can go up and down hills (and through the gears)
> > > without changing your cadence more than about 5 rpm.
> >
> > Why complicate things for the poor fella? Cadence features on computers
are
> > just a distraction and no-one needs them. BTW, what's Jobst's
hill-climbing
> > cadence? I even wonder if he knows ....
> >
> According to his tour of the alps summary, Jobst uses a use 180mm cranks with 47-50 and 13-24 for
> gears (6 spd I believe), for more see here:
>
http://www-math.science.unitn.it/Bike/Countries/Europe/Tour_Reports/Tour_of_ the_Alps/1990/

Actually, I kinda knew that. No mention of his cadence though. I bet he doesn't even count it.
That's my point, really.

>
> Not exactly the type of gearing a newbie should be starting at...
> > >
> > > It is tough to retrain yourself you may want to get a computer with cadence ... others would
> > > probably pick a different target but I usually suggest aiming for 80 rpm ( but since I have
> > > never ridden with you and never seen you I could be way off).
> >
> > And how do you "know" what the best cadence is, for anyone but yourself?
> >
> True, but at least a 39x26/27/28 wouldn't be a bad start for a newbie. What most mfrs and "product
> managers" don't seem to understand is that a 53t big chainring, while probably useful to most
> racers, is virtually useless to the majority of riders. IF these product managers were actually
> concerned about helping newbies learn to "enjoy" riding, they would spec new bikes
> accordingly...maybe something like 50/39 (or lower if the leading mfrs would also learn to make a
> 110bcd crank) with a 13x26/27/28 or larger rear. As I stated 39x26 or larger should get most
> people up even the most difficult of hills...

Couldn't agree more!

Robin Hubert

 

[Mikeyankee]

Strengthen yourself by riding the equipment you have. Avoid killer hills if you can't handle them...
the time will come when you can.

Going "soft" on equipment specs (e.g., triple crank + big easy cogs in back) may make things
easier in the short term, but for the long term your equipment is fine. Your conditioning just
needs to catch up.

Just one man's opinion.

Mike Yankee

(Address is munged to thwart spammers. To reply, delete everything after "com".)

 

[Jim Edgar]

Steve B at [email protected] wrote on 2/18/03 4:14 PM:
> Will a 12-27 be better? Much better? Will a Sheldon Century Special be even better?
You'll notice the 25, be amazed by the 27, and climb walls with the SCS - your call...
>
> If I change the rear casette, will it be expensive? Can I remove the 11 and 12 rings and add a 25
> and 27 ring? Can I do this myself?
>
Theoretically yes, but easier to just get a new cassette, which is a unit of the nine cogs.

> Also, my right knee hurts on the front, kind of a sharp, this-is-not-good acute pain. Sounds like
> I need to raise the seat a little and get a proper fitting. I think the bike fits well. I'm 6'2",
> 190, and the frame is a 59. I'm stretched out over the bars, and my legs extend to about a 170-175
> deg full extension.

Acute pain bad. Fitting good. Can't fit you over the computer.

>
> I definitely need ot get some legs. My two rides have been about 20-25 miles, with steep uphills,
> as I mentioned. And I have been climbing oput of the saddle.

Get out of the hills and get some nice, easy miles on the levelish bits. Get your muscles used to
the motion before you stress everything.

> So, again, thanks, and any tips on changing the rear casette will be appreciated!!!

You need a special tool that fits the cassette lockring - somewhere in the $
- 10 range IIRC, plus a big honking crescent wrench that'll hold it (needs to open to around 25 mm,
I reckon...), and a chain whip that will hold the cassette in place while you undo the lockring. I
think those are $15 or so.

It's four-thumbs-kinda-easy, but you need the right tools.

If you're gonna start messing with your bike, it's probably time to start amassing those tools.
It'll let you change later, if you want to. But, you don't have to _use_ the 27, sometimes it's just
nice that it's there.

You should own a chain tool (and carry it with you on rides) regardless, but you'll need one to
shorten the new chain appropriately for the new cassette.

If your LBS will throw the parts on for you, and set up the chain without charging excessively, that
might be the way to go. Treat your derailleur to a new cable, while it's up on the stand. Again,
your call.

hope that helps,

-- Jim

 

[David L. Johnso]

On Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:14:45 -0500, Steve B wrote:

> Will a 12-27 be better?

yes

> Much better?

No. Going from a 23 low to a 27 gives a 100(1 - 23/27)% lower gear, in this case 15% lower. Now,
that will help some, but only by 15%. Is that enough?

Will a Sheldon Century Special be
> even better?

Well, of course. But that will require a new derailleur.
>
> If I change the rear casette, will it be expensive?

$30

Can I remove the 11
> and 12 rings and add a 25 and 27 ring?

No. The first is position-specific. So are the biggest ones, and they are typically rivited together
as groups, anyway.
>
> Also, my right knee hurts on the front, kind of a sharp, this-is-not-good acute pain.

Suggests that the saddle is too low.

> I definitely need ot get some legs. My two rides have been about 20-25 miles, with steep uphills,
> as I mentioned.

What is steep? Marin is "steep". That steep?

--

David L. Johnson

__o | If all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a _`\(,_ | conclusion. --
George Bernard Shaw (_)/ (_) |