Forum menu
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 - MemberSeriously 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!
[img]
[/img]
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.
Oh dear - this summer I've been enjoying my 50/38 up front with an 11-28 block. Now after reading this thread I feel quite inadequate 😮
38 isn't very low Simon, I imagine you have an awful lot of overlap with that set up... I certainly don't think low gears are anything to feel inadequate about, the best climbers in the world (Wiggins, Contador etc) are all "seated spinners" rather than bar-honking grunters!
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!
You finished Willy Waving? 🙄
Your take on Joe Average and most people's is probably significantly different. For whatever reason, I'm significantly quicker and more competitive on a Mountain Bike than I am on a road bike, but I'm still quicker on a road bike than probably 95% of the public would be!
I certainly don't think low gears are anything to feel inadequate about, the best climbers in the world (Wiggins, Contador etc) are all "seated spinners" rather than bar-honking grunters!
I'm not going to call myself a good climber, but I do subscribe to the sit and spin method rather than the out of the saddle grunting method. Right or wrong, it's what works for me.
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.
Probably the same old boys that now come in asking me why there don't seem to be many bikes sold with Triples any more, cos though they used to manage fine with a close ratio double and a 12-23, they now want a 1:1 bottom gear or lower cos that's all they can manage these days!