[Closed] Road Bike Ratios... (I know, yawn)

11-28s are gappy as shit.

fine if you live somewhere hilly, but as soon as you go somewhere flat and ride into headwinds for a bit you'll instantly start finding 'missing' gears.

or at least i did.

grrrr.

i say if you're managing on 39/25 then go for the 52/38 and keep the 11-25 out back.

EDIT: baws i'm talking 10spd and you're talking 11. i still reckon 11-28 would be gappy, but haven't looked at the ratios.

I just posted "change gear" on another thread - I really, really dont get compact cranksets 😯

been looking at a new road bike, and the low / mid range bikes all seem to have compact chainsets.... why?

I've never regarded myself as either fit or competitive, but I will spin out my 53/39 set up on most rides

(just swapped out a 12-23 cassette for 11-25)

spin out my 53/39

you spin out 53/11 on [i]most [/i]rides?

yes

shit the bed.

I don't dislike the compact chainsets because a lot of the hills here are short but steep and I'm not racing or overly fascinated with KoMs on Strava so losing a bit on the downs doesn't bother me. I have an 11-28 on one bike but will swap it for the 11-25 for general riding now I'm done with bigger mountains for the year.

(maybe I need to learn to pedal quicker 😉 )

Is you're max cadence about 50 rpm? (53-11 at 100rpm is 38mph!)

I spin out 53/11 most rides too, I like to pedal descents and anything over 48mph spins out. Which is why I'm worried about dropping to 52 up front.

I'd rather have 53/38 or something like that.

Nicko, I hear what you're saying but the cassettes are limited to 23, 25 or 28 (lowest gear), so 28 shouldn't be any more gappy than the 11/25 10-speed I'm currently using...

been riding around the peaks for the last 3 years. and racing around flatter short circuit stuff for last 18 months.

can't say i use gears anywhere near 53:11 all that often. do you have lots of smooth downhillish bits?

or really strong legs?

53:11 is quite standard see? its not like the pros run anything bigger...

I like to pedal descents and anything over 48mph spins out

this might be the thing. round peaks etc. its hard to find a hill smooth enough to pedal down, and in flat races there aint any hills!

is front mech able to shift 53/38? whats the max tooth gap? - that said if you are going for a 28 anyway then 39/28 is pretty low...

I'm happy with 53:11 - over 50mph I want to be tucked, so not looking for more top-end cranking. Just a bit worried that 52:11 might leave me with a gap between where I like to finish pedalling and start tucking!

I ride the Pennines, South Lakes, Trough of Bowland mostly...

Edit: Just found this very useful site...

[url= http://www.bikecalc.com/gear_ratios ]Ratio Calculator[/url]

Is you're max cadence about 50 rpm?

Just looked at my Garmin stats for the Land's End 100 sportive. Avergae cadence was 63 - higher cadence sections about 95-100.... so yes, there is certainly room for me to increase my leg speed!

That ride was a lot of short steep hills though

doubt there's much in 52/11 vs 53/11...

especially as you'll be doing 50mph and sticking your head out the wind a touch more will make all the difference.

must say that's a punt though, i havent had the benefit of worrying about trying differing top end ratios!

53:11 to 52:11 is under 2% reduction in gearing, resulting in less than 1mph difference where you spin out.

Problem?

PaulD

that 0.7 mph could make all the difference.

I presume the chainset ratios are dictated by the limitations of the front mech.

If I'm doing something like the Lakeland Loop, I'd stick the compact on for the day, so I'm not averse to using lower gears - it's just the restrictiveness of a compact that I hate: no top end and constantly shifting between the rings.

I suspect the 52/36 is the way to go - I'm most efficient seated as I'm a high cadence rider, but my current setup sees me standing out of the saddle honking on the bars far more than I should.

The other factor is that if I decided to stick with 53/39, I could get that now... I'm having to wait for the other ratios!!

53:11 to 52:11 is under 2% reduction in gearing, resulting in less than 1mph difference where you spin out.

That's exactly the sort of answer I was looking for! Cheers Paul 🙂

OK, this is interesting. just run some figures through the calculator:

53/39 : 11/25 (current setup) = 41" - 126.8"
50/34 : 11/25 (compact setup) = 35.8" - 119.7"

52/38 : 11/28 (Dura Ace Sportive 1) = 35.8" - 124.4"
52/36 : 11/28 (Dura Ace Sportive 2) = 33.9" - 124.4"

So running the 52/38 will give me exactly the same length of lowest gear as my current compact setup, and presumably will be far better shifting on the front mech...

You spin out at 50 rpm? I wouldn't call that spinning out; I would call that stopping pedaling.

You spin out at 50 rpm?

Has anyone said this???

You spin out at 50 rpm?
Has anyone said this???

erm

but I will spin out my 53/39 set up on most rides

tracknicko - Member
spin out my 53/39
you spin out 53/11 on most rides?

rkk01 - Member
yes

I really, really dont get compact cranksets

Unless you'reusing 11-23 the jump to 25 is only fractionlay less than the jump from 38 to 34.

I use a compact, 11-23 in summer, 13-27 in winter.

What I don't understand is 'back in the day' the pissing contest was about who could spin the lowest gear, now the evangelists proclaim that a 52 just isn't big enough for their Hoy-esque legs, whilst at the same time telling everyone else they need to spin more.

Alex, you seem to be reading words that don't actually appear onscreen. Maybe you should toddle off and find a technician to fix it... Go on, there's a good boy...

TINAS, it's nothing to do with pissing contests. My cadence on the flat is higher than I would be comfortable pedaling at high speeds on descents.

I don't want to be spinning at 120rpm with all the associated wobbling at over 50mph!

Front double D-A mechs offer a 16T range on the 2 chainrings, but the triple front mechs have a deeper cage and cover 22T or more, so....

What is to stop you getting a 53T or larger front ring in 110mm BCD and retain the 34T compact small ring to get the best of both worlds?

If you keep swapping the large ring, you will need to keep moving the front mech up or down.

Fitting a 53T instead of 50T with the correct chain length will only be a rear mech chain slack issue if you try to run 34 x 11 (and we know where that got a famous TdF contender, don't we?).

Then chose the appropriate cassette to the terrain/season.

PaulD

Alex, you seem to be reading words that don't actually appear onscreen.

That was the point I was making.... I can't see any point where 50rpm is mentioned as the cadence at which anyone runs out of gears... 😯

I've not had the cadence sensor fitted on the road bike for very long, but for the mtb my cadence generally sits in to 60-100/120 range.

Yes you are of course right

All hail Sibboleth and his might mind.

but the triple front mechs have a deeper cage and cover 22T or more, so....

in two steps...

i dont think they could do that range in one go... or if they could the shift would be AWFUL.

also riding up to a hill in 53, then flicking to 34 ring would be like throwing an anchor out, or hitting neutral!

52/39/30 : 11/23 (Just saying like....) = 35.2" - 127.6" 😀

What is to stop you getting a 53T or larger front ring in 110mm BCD and retain the 34T compact small ring to get the best of both worlds?

They only ship the chainsets in those combinations Paul, and I doubt anywhere stocks the chainrings separately yet.

Aftermarket chainrings from other manufacturers won't fit...

[img] [/img]

alex222 - Member

Yes you are of course right

All hail Sibboleth and his might mind.

Alex, jog on mate, you're being a pillock. Nobody has said what you think they said, you misread it. Just accept that you're not very bright and go and think about what you've done. 🙄

druidh - Member

52/39/30 : 11/23 (Just saying like....) = 35.2" - 127.6"

Druid, wash your mouth out. In fact, don't anybody *EVER* mention the word "triple" on a thread about Dura Ace!!! 🙂

Alex, jog on mate, you're being a pillock. Nobody has said what you think they said, you misread it.

I accept I misread it but you are being a bit of a dick really.

triples are great for touring.

[img] [/img]

race touring?

"I don't want to be spinning at 120rpm with all the associated wobbling at over 50mph!
"

Pedal circles not squares please.

Pedal circles not squares please.

or stop pedaling before 50mph?

who pedals at 50+? that's tucking speed!

alex222 - Member

I accept I misread it but you are being a bit of a dick really.

This coming from the person that has tried to argue the toss with several people when he's wrong?? I started this thread to canvass opinion about something I needed help on, not to listen to some silly prick trying to belittle people with ill-conceived nit-picking. Jog on.

Either I'm not getting something or miscalculated it but if you are proposing to pedal at > 50mph downhill using a 53:11 ratio - your legs will have to be spinning at about [b]140RPM[/b].

And as somebody has already pointed out - this speed is a tucking in speed.

Interestingly and to put things into perspective - a well known TdF rider chasing (going like the clappers) the leading rider in this years TdF - descended 850 meters and averaged only 39mph to the finish line... (are you in the right job? 🙂 )

edit - and the spread on 11:28 ratio - I find is too wide.
On occasion, I have run this ratio with a 53:39 upfront though but I find it not ideal.

not to listen to some silly prick trying to belittle people with ill-conceived nit-picking

I am no expert but I think you may need some fresh air.

Mudsux, firstly, I'm talking about the 11-speed 2013 DA groupset so the ratio gaps are pretty similar to the 11/25 10 speed I'm running.

Where have you got the 140rpm figure? Is there a calculator for this? As I said, I pedal up to about 48mph. Anything over that (or less depending on the road) I would certainly be tucked.

I'm not sure what point you're making with your reference to the TdF rider, I'm sure he achieved top speeds of over 50mph too. We all have to slow down a bit for corners, pros and amateurs.

Interestingly, I've just found this [url= http://www.machars.net/bikecalc.htm ]calculator[/url] and worked out that I'd be doing 120rpm at just over 45mph with my 53:11 setup.

If I go to 52:11, I'd be doing 44.4mph at the same cadence...

I think I can live with that! I'll just have to tuck a bit lower to shake of Thor 😉

the racing triple !

The bike is set up for crits, and I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't mind a few lower gears on some of the steeper climbs..

Which crits have these 'steeper' climbs? i'd say you're not cut out for crit racing if you can't manage a crit on a 53/39 with an 11-25 out back

None have steeper climbs. That's why the bike is set up like that. I train on hilly roads though.

The Cervélo I'm building won't be used for crits, I'll keep the old Giant for that job, but I want it to be a do-it-all bike for sportives, Mallorca, Alps etc...

120 rpm is barely spinning. That's 24 mph on my fixed wheel. I can manage 33 mph downhill (well you don't get much choice). I suggest improving your pedaling technique first. In general, most people bemoan the lack of a low gear before a high gear. For Sportives, doubly so. Coasting is always an option and will cost you almost nothing. Grinding up a hill will sap your energy and cost you much more time.

So I'd go compact or bigger than 25 on the back. I'm a fan of compact, personally, but have both.

I think you're right DJ, but I don't need to go as far as a compact to get the ratios, so either 52/36 or 52/38 is going to do the job.

And yes, I'm perfectly comfortable spinning at well over 120, I don't want to be doing that at over 50mph!

agree with dj right up to the recommendation bit.

i'd go 53/39 or 52/38 with an 11-28 (11spd so less gaps?)

then you're all set.

39/28 on a light bike will get up pretty much anything of any steepness or length.

120 rpm is barely spinning. That's 24 mph on my fixed wheel. I can manage 33 mph downhill

160rpm downhill - that must look quite comical!

And if you're [i]comfortable[/i] at over 120rpm - you're probably in the wrong gear (but if you're fixed - that's a different story). If you're doing a sprint to the line that's probably around about the cadence you would be hitting but you'll be a spent force afterwards.

Must say I do like the compact on my winter bike now, and will probably go compact on my next decent bike! 50-11 > 53-12.

Seriously, MTFU and get a triple!

Seems completely daft not to IMO.

Seriously, MTFU and get a triple!

If you want a wide range AND small jumps between gears, it's the only way...

52:36 11-28 sounds the obvious answer considering you want to use it over a range of events. I can't believe a 52:36 change is noticeably worse than a 52:38 change and I can't see any other downsides, you might even save a gram or two in weight :p
I'm impressed you pedal up to 48mph though, I'm tucked in before 40mph and still gain on the pedallers. I can envisage someone spinning out 53:11 in a cat 1/elite RR on a long gradual downhill whilst stuck in the bunch who are going full gas, I'd imagine that would be a rare occurrence for most though.

40mph downhill is not a big deal, I accidently did that in the Alps this summer and was clocked by the local gendarmerie coasting past them at 75.3kmh whilst casually taking a drink from my water bottle. How we laughed when they finally caught me up and I told them my name was "edgar".

A chapeau vraiment moment.

Indeed 40mph isn't that quick, especially on big mountain descents but the point was more I find it faster tucking properly (chin nearly on stem and even ass crack on top tube if it's a non-techy descent) than pedalling if it's gets above 40mph

52:36 11-28 sounds the obvious answer considering you want to use it over a range of events. I can't believe a 52:36 change is noticeably worse than a 52:38 change and I can't see any other downsides, you might even save a gram or two in weight :p

I think this is correct - 2 teeth on the front will make a minimal difference to the actual diametre of the rings so front mech shifting shouldn't be affected. The 2013 DA front mech is supposed to be world leading in terms of shifting, so it's going to be an improvement on the older Ultegra/Dura Ace combo I'm using at the moment.

I tend to find that I sprint up to speed on descents, then tuck. The quicker you get up to top speed, the quicker you get down.

Plus, I get a perverse pleasure out of beating my max speeds!

Seriously why can't people use triples?

It's like saying: "I'd love to own that car, it's the best car in the world, but it's a BMW, and my peer gruop says it's uncool, and I'm incapable of making my own decisions unfettered."

cynic-al - Member

Seriously why can't people use triples?

Erm... Because they're shite? There's so much overlap between the ratios, it's completely unnecessary on a race bike! The only time you could justify it is on a tourer where you might need a 25" gear to haul a pannier-laden bike up a steep climb. And even then, you should really MTFU...

Wow, personal insults...lost the argument straight away.

If you were correct, why is it taking you so long to decide what you need? Because the double is a compromise. Bottom gear no a road triple is 30/23 or so anyway - nothing like 25", and I'll happily accept there are times when I may want that, becuase I am not AWESOME enough.

I'd respect you more if you could admit it's just about vanity.

Just go SS for a full top up of AWESOME points.

LOL at Cynic-al!!

Nail on head mind you.

I'd quite like to meet these guys who make such a fuss about gear ratios.I work with and sponsor a vareity of cat 1/elite racers (one of them just won L'Eroica) and they just slap on a 53/39 adn swap cassettes as/if required.

I'd respect you more if you could admit it's just about vanity.

I'd probably give your argument more credence if Shimano actually made a Dura Ace triple! 🙄

There's a reason they don't - modern technology allows a wider range of gears than ever before with a double. Why would anyone want another chainring and loads of overlap?

SS is the obvious answer.

front mech trim is my problem with triples.

wider width at front means you cant run the entire length up and down the block, requiring more front shifts.

just not a very neat solution IMO.

i was touring it would be triple all the way (range and minimal gaps as you say) but for racing I can't see them working too good.

as i said before. a grown man on a light bike should be able to handle standard 53/39 no bother when paired with an 11 or 12-28.
particularly if 11spd takes most the larger gaps out.

as i said before. a grown man on a light bike should be able to handle standard 53/39 no bother when paired with an 11 or 12-28.
particularly if 11spd takes most the larger gaps out.

Hmmm... There goes another spanner in the works! Just referred back to the calculator and 39:28 is 36.6", a compact with a 25 on the back comes out at 37.9". So I'd end up with a lower gear than I have on my compact set up... Interesting... Confusing... I'm still in 2 minds!

That's 150% more mind than I was crediting you with.

53/39 cus it's what's meant to be on a race bike and just change the rear cassette. I use 11-23 for a lot of races but particularly hilly one's I change to an 12-25

a triple on a race bike. Don't be stupid

Yo could also build upa custom cassette with a big gap, but better to do big gaps at the front.

52/38 or 52/36 sounds good, one of the issue I have with 50/34 is it is such a big drop you also end up having to rear shift as well.

triples make sense but only with a wide ratio cassette

Shibboleth - Member
Why would anyone want another chainring and loads of overlap?

For smaller gaps between gears, and not having to shift at the front all the time. This is important to those that race, isn't it? It was to me when I did it.

For smaller gaps between gears, and not having to shift at the front all the time. This is important to those that race, isn't it? It was to me when I did it.

If that was the case, those that race would use triples. The fact of the matter is, those that race don't need gear inches in single figures so they use doubles.

39/28 on a light bike will get up pretty much anything of any steepness or length.

If only everyone was created equal! 🙄

Got a 12-30 with a 34/50 compact on my new bike, had 12-27 on the last one with a compact and whilst when my legs were reasonably fresh I could get up short sharp 20% + hills just about ok, when your legs are screwed cos they've already got a lot of miles in them it just makes more sense to me to have the lower bailout gear if it's available. Though I'm a completely different market to the OP as I'm not racing Crit's, but firmly in the average Joe category who likes to just ride his bike.

For those decrying about how wide the 11-28 ratio 10spd cassettes are though, the top 8 ratios are exactly the same as on an 11-25. The only differences are the first two, where you get 28-24-21 jumps on the 11-28, and 25-23-21 jumps on the 11-25. And let's face it, if you're using the bottom 2 cogs of the cassette on your outer chainring, you REALLY need to shift to the inner ring and drop down the block a couple of ratios on the back! The 11-28 is a very good compromise cassette as it allows the racer the same ratios as an 11-25 across 80% of the cassette, with just the very extreme bailout options at the bottom.

Or if you still dislike the ratio gaps that much, then see Rule 5! 😉

Personally I need all the help I can get (I even thought about a Triple, as Al says for a lot of riders they do make sense, though not for racing agreed, but also not many good bikes have a triple option these days), so will unashamedly tootle along with my 30T cog on the back of my bike!

[quote=Shibboleth ]The fact of the matter is, those that race[s] don't need gear inches in single figures so they use doubles.[/s] find the standard gear ratios sufficient.

This is important to those that race, isn't it?

maybe in a 250k audax or reliability ride but not in a race. If you think you need a triple for racing then you shouldn't be racing. You honestly shouldn't need it.

Shibboleth - Member - Quote
I'd probably give your argument more credence if Shimano actually made a Dura Ace triple!

That's a 7800 series... We've had 7900 and now 9000 since then. The Dura Ace triple has been consigned to the history books, probably due to lack of demand. Probably due to it being completely pointless. Fact.

I should add that this chainset is still available to buy as NOS, because nobody bought them when they were the current range!

Shibboleth - Member
If that was the case, those that race would use triples. The fact of the matter is, those that race don't need gear inches in single figures so they use doubles.

Where did I say racers need lower gears? You are the one who started a thread about gearing for racing that had low gears, so you lose your own willy-waving contest.

When I raced I used 42-52 and 13-23. I tried a 39 - useful for a hilly TT once, but a PITA otherwise.

And let's face it, if you're using the bottom 2 cogs of the cassette on your outer chainring, you REALLY need to shift to the inner ring and drop down the block a couple of ratios on the back!

FIRMLY disagree with this.

also... if you are genuinely struggling with 34/27 on hills then I'm sorry to say you aint Joe average!

up until not that long ago the old boys i ride with were rocking 42/23 and riding winnatts, monsal, and all the other character-filled hills we have round here.

EDIT: that sounded unnecessarily harsh, and i didn't mean it to be.

i agree 11-28 is the way forward for the OP. particularly in less-gappy 11spd formation.

don't need gear inches in single figures so they use doubles.

Where did I say racers need lower gears? You are the one who started a thread about gearing for racing that had low gears, so you lose your own willy-waving contest.

what is clear from the Grand tours is that the pro alter their ratios for each stage depending on nature of stages. hence use of the WiFli systems, single rings in TTs etc

but then they have the option of lots of kit.

And let's face it, if you're using the bottom 2 cogs of the cassette on your outer chainring, you REALLY need to shift to the inner ring and drop down the block a couple of ratios on the back!

Agree - bad for the chain otherwise

bad for the chain otherwise

totally inconsequential mid race. when snot is crying out of your eyes, you just keep jamming through the gears. if i had to knock it into small ring and down the block then it would be game over.

agree with what you are saying in terms of wear rate, and angle of chain is grim for triples. but i [b]regularly [/b] use either end of the block in either front ring when using a double chainset. - no ill effects so far.

agree with what you are saying in terms of wear rate, and angle of chain is grim for triples. but i regularly use either end of the block in either front ring when using a double chainset. - no ill effects so far.

imagine we all do.