Will I fall over by going too slow



W

Willy Smallboy

Guest
I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when going up a
mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t front and a 34t rear and
it is NOT low enough for me. I think this would be low enough:

a Schlumpf Mountain-Drive front (40% reduction) with a 17t
front gear and a SRAM Dual Speed Drive (73% reduction) rear
with a 34t rear gear. I figured this would go about 10
inches per one pedal revolution. (Using Schlumpf's Excel
spreadsheet)

BUT it seems this cannot be done. SRAM seems not recommended
for loaded touring (they say no tandems or delivery bikes).
I think Mountain-Drive's lowest gear is 27t. So now I think
I can do this:

Front 27t with a Moutain-Drive (Schlumpf said this is equal
to a 11t gear) and a 34 rear. Schlumpf says that this is too
low and I would fall off the bike. I think I can pedal about
40 rpm. Does anyone know in MPH how fast this is (I know it
might be slower than walking but walking and pushing my bike
is harder on my bad leg than pedalling). And with low center
of gravity and heavy bags would I fall over? My gut feeling
is I would not. I have gone very slow with my old set up.

Does anyone have this setup?

If you ever see someone pedalling like crazy and going very
slow that might be me.
 
B

Bbense+Rec Bicy

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
***** Smallboy <[email protected]> wrote:
>I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when
>going up a mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t
>front and a 34t rear and it is NOT low enough for me. I
>think this would be low enough:
>
>
>a Schlumpf Mountain-Drive front (40% reduction) with a 17t
>front gear and a SRAM Dual Speed Drive (73% reduction) rear
>with a 34t rear gear. I figured this would go about 10
>inches per one pedal revolution. (Using Schlumpf's Excel
>spreadsheet)
>
>BUT it seems this cannot be done. SRAM seems not
>recommended for loaded touring (they say no tandems or
>delivery bikes). I think Mountain-Drive's lowest gear is
>27t. So now I think I can do this:
>
>
>Front 27t with a Moutain-Drive (Schlumpf said this is equal
>to a 11t gear) and a 34 rear. Schlumpf says that this is
>too low and I would fall off the bike. I think I can pedal
>about 40 rpm. Does anyone know in MPH how fast this is (I
>know it might be slower than walking but walking and
>pushing my bike is harder on my bad leg than pedalling).
>And with low center of gravity and heavy bags would I fall
>over? My gut feeling is I would not. I have gone very slow
>with my old set up.
>

_ You can input gears and rpm and get mph out at this site.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/

_ Booker C. Bense
 

meb

New Member
Aug 21, 2003
1,219
0
36
Originally posted by ***** Smallboy
I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when going up a
mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t front and a 34t rear and
it is NOT low enough for me. I think this would be low enough:

a Schlumpf Mountain-Drive front (40% reduction) with a 17t
front gear and a SRAM Dual Speed Drive (73% reduction) rear
with a 34t rear gear. I figured this would go about 10
inches per one pedal revolution. (Using Schlumpf's Excel
spreadsheet)

BUT it seems this cannot be done. SRAM seems not recommended
for loaded touring (they say no tandems or delivery bikes).
I think Mountain-Drive's lowest gear is 27t. So now I think
I can do this:

Front 27t with a Moutain-Drive (Schlumpf said this is equal
to a 11t gear) and a 34 rear. Schlumpf says that this is too
low and I would fall off the bike. I think I can pedal about
40 rpm. Does anyone know in MPH how fast this is (I know it
might be slower than walking but walking and pushing my bike
is harder on my bad leg than pedalling). And with low center
of gravity and heavy bags would I fall over? My gut feeling
is I would not. I have gone very slow with my old set up.

Does anyone have this setup?

If you ever see someone pedalling like crazy and going very
slow that might be me.

10” per pedal revolution would be correct for a rare 22” tire.
You said about so 11” with a 24 or 9” with a 20 are more plausible.
What size drive tire?

The latter gear ratio (assumes you deliberately omitted the dual drive) would have a speed around 2 mph with a cadence of 40 rpm. Not impossible to stay up at that low speed, but not something everyone can do.

The latter gear ratio you mentioned has a gear ratio of about 7 gear inches (multiply gear inches time pi to get number of inches travelled per pedal revolution).
Recumbent trikes sometimes have ratios in the neigborhood of 15 gear inches, but they don’t have the same balance issues.
 
C

Chris Zacho "Th

Guest
I can stand totally still on an uphill.

Basically, the slower you go, the more effort you have to
put into balancing the bike. Because the wheels aren't
rolling as fast, your corrections will not take effect as
fast, so they need to be more extreme.

Try your 20/34 and pedal only half as fast as you usually
would, This would simulate pedalling your normal cadence in
a gear half as high (or twice as low, however you want to
look at it).

- - "May you have the wind at your back. And a really low
gear for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner http://www.geocities.com/czcorner
 
B

Bob Flumere

Guest
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 22:05:52 +0000 (UTC), <bbense+rec.bicyc-
[email protected]>

>In article <[email protected]>,
>***** Smallboy <[email protected]> wrote:
>>I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when
>>going up a mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t
>>front and a 34t rear and it is NOT low enough for me. I
>>think this would be low enough:
>>
>>

I ride a 20 - 34 low gear combination on my Fisher Sugar Mtn
bike (26" wheels) all of the time..

I can' t recollect having fallen over from going too
slowly, and I certainly have sometimes wished for an even
lower gear.. I'm probably turning it at about 75 to 90
RPMS. (New England hilly, wooded, rocky, terrain and.....
I'm 60 yrs old..

Bob Flumere [email protected]
 
R

Rick Onanian

Guest
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 13:12:11 -0800, ***** Smallboy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Front 27t with a Moutain-Drive (Schlumpf said this is equal
>to a 11t gear) and a 34 rear. Schlumpf says that this is
>too low and I would fall off the bike. I think I can pedal
>about 40 rpm. Does anyone know in MPH how fast this is (I
>know it might be slower than walking

You really ought to include more information -- tire size,
for example.

That said, here's what http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
has to say: 700x23 tire, Schlumpf Mountain Drive low gear,
27t front, 34t rear, 40 rpm: 1.0 mph.

Go there and try your different gear combinations as
you please.

>but walking and pushing my bike is harder on my bad leg
>than pedalling). And with low center of gravity and heavy
>bags would I fall over? My gut feeling is I would not. I
>have gone very slow with my old set up.

Have you considered a tricycle? You could certainly put
gears as low as you please on that and never fall over.
--
Rick Onanian
 
J

Joel Mayes

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, ***** Smallboy wrote:
> I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when
> going up a mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t
> front and a 34t rear and it is NOT low enough for me. I
> think this would be low enough:
>

Depends on how well you can balance, a lot of cyclists can
balance while not moving, I find anything under 8-9 km/h
requires me to concentrate on my balance.

Have you considered getting a recumbent trike? you can gear
these down as much as you want and never worry about balance

--
| Joel Mayes | /~\ ASCII Ribbon campaign Accordionist | \_/
| stop HTML mail and news Musician | / \ Music Teacher |
 
C

Carl Fogel

Guest
***** Smallboy <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when
> going up a mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t
> front and a 34t rear and it is NOT low enough for me. I
> think this would be low enough:
>
>
> a Schlumpf Mountain-Drive front (40% reduction) with a 17t
> front gear and a SRAM Dual Speed Drive (73% reduction)
> rear with a 34t rear gear. I figured this would go about
> 10 inches per one pedal revolution. (Using Schlumpf's
> Excel spreadsheet)
>
> BUT it seems this cannot be done. SRAM seems not
> recommended for loaded touring (they say no tandems or
> delivery bikes). I think Mountain-Drive's lowest gear is
> 27t. So now I think I can do this:
>
>
> Front 27t with a Moutain-Drive (Schlumpf said this is
> equal to a 11t gear) and a 34 rear. Schlumpf says that
> this is too low and I would fall off the bike. I think I
> can pedal about 40 rpm. Does anyone know in MPH how fast
> this is (I know it might be slower than walking but
> walking and pushing my bike is harder on my bad leg than
> pedalling). And with low center of gravity and heavy bags
> would I fall over? My gut feeling is I would not. I have
> gone very slow with my old set up.
>
> Does anyone have this setup?
>
> If you ever see someone pedalling like crazy and going
> very slow that might be me.

Dear *****,

As others have indicated, given the wheel and crank size,
you can get a fair idea of your gearing from Sheldon Brown's
excellent calculator.

Suggestions about a trike also seem worth considering. Apart
from gearing and balance, they can offer arm-powered
arrangements that might be an improvement.

Before putting anything into practice, you'll need to
calculate the distance involved at such low speeds and give
yourself considerable leeway. If, as Rick Onanian thinks,
your gearing and cadence will deliver only one mile per
hour, an eight mile climb in low gear will take a very long
day, whether it can be balanced or not, and few mountain
passes are much shorter than that.

Good luck,

Carl Fogel
 

meb

New Member
Aug 21, 2003
1,219
0
36
Originally posted by Carl Fogel
***** Smallboy <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when
> going up a mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t
> front and a 34t rear and it is NOT low enough for me. I
> think this would be low enough:
>
>
> a Schlumpf Mountain-Drive front (40% reduction) with a 17t
> front gear and a SRAM Dual Speed Drive (73% reduction)
> rear with a 34t rear gear. I figured this would go about
> 10 inches per one pedal revolution. (Using Schlumpf's
> Excel spreadsheet)
>
> BUT it seems this cannot be done. SRAM seems not
> recommended for loaded touring (they say no tandems or
> delivery bikes). I think Mountain-Drive's lowest gear is
> 27t. So now I think I can do this:
>
>
> Front 27t with a Moutain-Drive (Schlumpf said this is
> equal to a 11t gear) and a 34 rear. Schlumpf says that
> this is too low and I would fall off the bike. I think I
> can pedal about 40 rpm. Does anyone know in MPH how fast
> this is (I know it might be slower than walking but
> walking and pushing my bike is harder on my bad leg than
> pedalling). And with low center of gravity and heavy bags
> would I fall over? My gut feeling is I would not. I have
> gone very slow with my old set up.
>
> Does anyone have this setup?
>
> If you ever see someone pedalling like crazy and going
> very slow that might be me.

Dear *****,

As others have indicated, given the wheel and crank size,
you can get a fair idea of your gearing from Sheldon Brown's
excellent calculator.

Suggestions about a trike also seem worth considering. Apart
from gearing and balance, they can offer arm-powered
arrangements that might be an improvement.

Before putting anything into practice, you'll need to
calculate the distance involved at such low speeds and give
yourself considerable leeway. If, as Rick Onanian thinks,
your gearing and cadence will deliver only one mile per
hour, an eight mile climb in low gear will take a very long
day, whether it can be balanced or not, and few mountain
passes are much shorter than that.

Good luck,

Carl Fogel

Carl mentioned handtrikes.

Here's the top of the line manufacturer:

http://www.bike-on.com/newhandcycles/varnaII.html

There are also rowbikes that combine arm and leg use- some as quads and trikes as well as some bikes.

Electric power assist could also be an option.
 
J

Jeffk

Guest
I like trike!

What's the British trike company? I recall seeing some
beautiful machines from England.

Occasionally I see a local guy, 80 or 90 years old, trike
rider, pedaling along with a BIG smile on local roads. 99%
of my neighbors would not make that trip without an
automobile. That guy is an inspiration.
 
R

Rocketman58

Guest
I would suggest you looking at a recumbent trike. With a 20"
(406) drive wheel, you can use your 20x34 setup and crawl up
hills without ever falling over. Trikes can be expensive,
but there are some more moderate priced ones coming onto the
market soon. SUN makes some better priced models, and they
will have a new one out some time this year which may be a
good choice for touring. It will have one rear wheel with
two front - all 20". Check bentrideronline.com for more info
on trikes.

My MTB has a 20x34 low gear (41,30,20 crank). I have been
fooling around with setups as low as 17x34. 17x34 can be
almost too low off road. You have to keep the cadance up so
as not to fall over. This is sometimes hard to do on
technical trails. However, it was no problem on pavement.
You can use a Mountain Quad or Triple for a gear down to
16x34. See http://abundantadventures.com/quads.html for more
info. Biggest poblem with such a small ring, is that you
have to limit the size of your big ring. I'm considering a
38,28,18 crank with a 12x34 cassette setup on my MTB.

Rocketman58


***** Smallboy <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> I am handicapped and I want a very low gear to use when
> going up a mountain with loaded bags. I have used a 20t
> front and a 34t rear and it is NOT low enough for me. I
> think this would be low enough:
>
>
> a Schlumpf Mountain-Drive front (40% reduction) with a 17t
> front gear and a SRAM Dual Speed Drive (73% reduction)
> rear with a 34t rear gear. I figured this would go about
> 10 inches per one pedal revolution. (Using Schlumpf's
> Excel spreadsheet)
>
> BUT it seems this cannot be done. SRAM seems not
> recommended for loaded touring (they say no tandems or
> delivery bikes). I think Mountain-Drive's lowest gear is
> 27t. So now I think I can do this:
>
>
> Front 27t with a Moutain-Drive (Schlumpf said this is
> equal to a 11t gear) and a 34 rear. Schlumpf says that
> this is too low and I would fall off the bike. I think I
> can pedal about 40 rpm. Does anyone know in MPH how fast
> this is (I know it might be slower than walking but
> walking and pushing my bike is harder on my bad leg than
> pedalling). And with low center of gravity and heavy bags
> would I fall over? My gut feeling is I would not. I have
> gone very slow with my old set up.
>
> Does anyone have this setup?
>
> If you ever see someone pedalling like crazy and going
> very slow that might be me.
 
J

Jeff Wills

Guest
"JeffK" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I like trike!
>
> What's the British trike company? I recall seeing some
> beautiful machines from England.
>
> Occasionally I see a local guy, 80 or 90 years old, trike
> rider, pedaling along with a BIG smile on local roads. 99%
> of my neighbors would not make that trip without an
> automobile. That guy is an inspiration.

Upright trikes are built by Longstaff:
http://www.longstaffcycles.co.uk/

Recumbent trikes are available from Inspired Cycle
Engineering: http://www.ice.hpv.co.uk/ Check out the fancy
(optional) lugwork:
http://www.ice.hpv.co.uk/trike_details_options.htm

However, perhaps these are the people to ask: http://www.tricycle-
association.org.uk/

Jeff
 
C

Charles Ramsey

Guest
Steve roberts had a recumbent called the behemoth
http://microship.com/bike/behemoth/index.html it pulled a
trailer with a total load of about 500 lbs the bike had two
gearing systems with a low of 7.5 it also had training
wheels he called landing wheels that he could lower at low
speeds to keep from falling over. I find it hard to go
slower than 2.5 mph.