COMPACT- Will it be 'low enough'?

gjh0702
gjh0702 Posts: 52
edited March 2008 in Workshop
I have the 'third' ring, but still struggle on climbs. Damaged right knee wont take too much pressure. LBS has suggested 'Compact' - I am looking at Campag, just worried that the 'easiest' gears will not be low enough. Want to be able to 'spin' rather than grunt & fallover near the top which has happened three times in last few years. :cry:
Very much welcome comments- thanks

Comments

  • SteveR_100Milers
    SteveR_100Milers Posts: 5,987
    take a look on sheldon browns website for a gear inch chart. Compare your current triple lowest against a low compact (usually a 34 x 27 though I think you could probably get a lower ratio rear cassette). For reference a 34 x 27 is a 35" gear.
    http://www.pontypoolrcc.co.uk/
    www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=44397853765
  • cabron
    cabron Posts: 16
    On the Etape last year I saw a few people using a road triple with a MTB cassette and rear mech. You could go to 11-32 or even 11-34 at the back with that arrangement, and it's probably lower and cheaper than a new chainset? They got a few disdainful looks but I'm sure they had the last laugh when they were able to pedal up the Peyresourde past lots of "proper" riders who were overgeared and walking..

    Edit: Just noticed you're using Campag. Not sure if that wil work then, sorry!
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    If you are struggling with the granny ring on a compact, normally 30T, then it'll be even harder with a 34T off a compact.

    I'd suggest getting a 13-29 Campag cassette to give you the lowest possible gear of 30/29

    Compact will you give you a lowest of 34/29.
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • richa
    richa Posts: 1,631
    gjh0702 wrote:
    I have the 'third' ring, but still struggle on climbs.
    LBS has suggested 'Compact'.

    Struggling on climbs with a 30T but the LBS suggested a 34T? Don't see the sense in this.

    What cassette do you currently have? 12/25? Consider a 13/28. This is a 12% improvement which should be significant.
    Rich
  • jhop
    jhop Posts: 369
    gjh0702 wrote:
    I have the 'third' ring, but still struggle on climbs. LBS has suggested 'Compact'

    I too am confused.

    You can't surely get any lower by using a compact as the inner rings on a compact only go down to 34.

    To get lower as others have said you need to put some super big sprockets on the rear.

    With Campag that could be a 29 and that should allow you to spin up steep climbs.

    It is what my friends riding the FWC are planning to use.
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    As others have said, going compact which will give you a higher bottom gear sounds like a very poor idea. Alternative to bigger rear sprockets is a smaller granny ring - you should be able to fit a 24 on a normal triple, though I reckon a 26 works better with a racing style one (we have 52/39/26 on the tandem).
  • hamstercp
    hamstercp Posts: 639
    If you have a Campag triple you can fit a 24T ring as the granny gear (about 7 quid) which will save you changing the cassette.

    Ask for a 74mm PCD inner 5 bolt (old style MTB) ring.

    You might need to shorten the chain slightly to stop it going slack, but whatever you do ensure it's long enough to fit the big-big combination of chainrings and sprocket.
    "It must be true, I saw it on the Internet!"
  • trekvet
    trekvet Posts: 223
    I`ve got a MTB cassette and XT rear mech on my Airborne Zeppelin (I ordered it with them) and can indeed ride up where others are stalling on their doubles and getting in my way (Brassknocker 1 in 7). I don`t have a problem having MTB parts on a road bike; any problem is theirs. I know I`m the one with the knee cartilage that will last longer. Another advantage is the parts are indentical to my MTB so could swap either way if needed.
    The Wife complained for months about the empty pot of bike oil on the hall stand; so I replaced it with a full one.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    TA makes a 33 tooth, front compact chainring, 110 BCD, for those of you looking for a bit more help with your climbing. Just looked at it on Harris Cyclerys website.

    Dennis Noward
  • willbevan
    willbevan Posts: 1,241
    can you link that 33T, interested in getting one

    Thanks

    Will
    Road - BTwin Sport 2 16s
    MTB - Trek Fuel 80
    TT - Echelon

    http://www.rossonwye.cyclists.co.uk/
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    willbevan wrote:
    can you link that 33T, interested in getting one

    Thanks

    Will


    http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/chainrings/110.html

    Dennis Noward
  • mike ives
    mike ives Posts: 319
    Why bother changing? Why not walk up the hills sometimes; admire the views, take in the air. Cycling is meant to be enjoyable. There are no prizes for hurting yourself.
  • rustychisel
    rustychisel Posts: 3,444
    Yes, but then, walking isn't cycling, is it?
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    I\'m only escaping to here because the office is having a conniption
  • geoff_ss
    geoff_ss Posts: 1,201
    I deliberately set up my new bike for hilly riding on my aged legs/lungs. I have a MTB triple chainset (44/32/22) coupled with a 9 speed 13-25 cassette.

    I'm a great advocate of low gears. This set up gives me an adequate top gear of 90" (which I can pedal at 25mph) and a bottom of 23" which should get me up most hills. The Shimano 105 medium length rear derailleur copes with that range easily.

    Geoff
    Old cyclists never die; they just fit smaller chainrings ... and pedal faster
  • ut_och_cykla
    ut_och_cykla Posts: 1,594
    Yes I go teh MTB route as well - especially for teh Alps - 30 front 32 back is great! But at home where life is flatter I just chnge ethcassette for a flatter block - eg like a 11-26.
    Don't make life more difficult - you're unlikely to get fit enough to enjoy higher gears but lower gears will extend your ability & confidence.

Categories