Compact to 53/39 - problems
another boring compact question i'm afraid but this time going the other way.
Just changed from a compact 50/34 to a traditional 53/39 after a lot of advice that the compact was doing me no good and i was becoming too strong for it. To be honest i'm struggling with the 53/39 big style, i find the 39 inner ring too much.
i was wondering if a 52/36 chainset exists? If so does anyone use one? and would it be possible to take off the 53/39 rings and put on the 52/36 rings or is it not as simple as that?
Or alternatively do I just work my back side off and come to terms with the 53/39?
Just changed from a compact 50/34 to a traditional 53/39 after a lot of advice that the compact was doing me no good and i was becoming too strong for it. To be honest i'm struggling with the 53/39 big style, i find the 39 inner ring too much.
i was wondering if a 52/36 chainset exists? If so does anyone use one? and would it be possible to take off the 53/39 rings and put on the 52/36 rings or is it not as simple as that?
Or alternatively do I just work my back side off and come to terms with the 53/39?
0
Comments
-
If you are using Shimano you can get a 38T inner ring so that might be an option ?
What ratio's have you got on the back ? as altering that might be an option for you to.0 -
I have the same problem with the 39 - hence I'm looking to go to a compact with 50/34.
What was the reason behind people saying you were too strong for the 50/34?i was wondering if a 52/36 chainset exists? If so does anyone use one? and would it be possible to take off the 53/39 rings and put on the 52/36 rings or is it not as simple as that?
Do you still have your compact? Could you re-fit it?Never argue with an idiot - they drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience0 -
i'm using campag chorus.
i'm on a 12-23 cassette
found with the compact i spent 95% of a ride in the big ring and now I'm finding having to jump about between the rings a lot more. Maybe it's this that i'm having trouble coming to terms with0 -
Training with racing groups etc, they all said i was too strong for it and that it wouldn't do me any good long term.
Still got the compact and was planning on fitting it to a lightweight bike for when i go abroad0 -
with a 110mm BCD chainset (compact) you can have any rings you like:
small ring - anything from 33 upwards
big ring - anything from 33 upwards...
so 36/52 is possible
the only issue is the gap between the two. 16 is about as much as you can handle, any more and shifting gets a lot worse.
you can even run 39/53 if you want. TA, Middleburn, Strongligh all do a wide range of 110 rings. I swap mine about all the time, depending on what kind of ridng+terrain I'm on.Facts are meaningless, you can use facts to prove anything that's remotely true! - Homer0 -
maddog 2 wrote:with a 110mm BCD chainset (compact) you can have any rings you like:
small ring - anything from 33 upwards
big ring - anything from 33 upwards...
so 36/52 is possible
the only issue is the gap between the two. 16 is about as much as you can handle, any more and shifting gets a lot worse.
you can even run 39/53 if you want. TA, Middleburn, Strongligh all do a wide range of 110 rings. I swap mine about all the time, depending on what kind of ridng+terrain I'm on.
Stronglight do two different sorts, in Zicral (7075 grade) and Dural (5083 grade) aluminium alloys. If you're on a tight budget, the Dural ones are nice and cheap, though the lifespan is only half that of the Zicral ones. Still, I guess you could upgrade later once you're up and running. The Zicral ones also come in CT2 format with a ceramic coating and Teflon surface treatment for a mix of durablility and smoother running. Expensive but good for pose value (as used by Voeckler et al at Bouygues Telecom!).
David"It is not enough merely to win; others must lose." - Gore Vidal0 -
jonty1977 wrote:Training with racing groups etc, they all said i was too strong for it and that it wouldn't do me any good long term.
Meanwhile I believe the British Crit championship was won by somebody on a compact a few years ago, and I doubt any of the people in your racing group are stronger than him. Personally as somebody not exceptionally strong, but a half decent club rider, I've changed to a compact for my main road bike this year - with the result that I've got better times in time trials than I have for over 5 years despite not really training properly for them, so it doesn't seem to have harmed me. I too spend most of my time in big ring on a compact - but I don't actually see what's wrong with that, the little ring being just for when it starts going up lots.0 -
jonty1977 wrote:
Just changed from a compact 50/34 to a traditional 53/39 after a lot of advice that the compact was doing me no good and i was becoming too strong for it. To be honest i'm struggling with the 53/39 big style, i find the 39 inner ring too much.
Or alternatively do I just work my back side off and come to terms with the 53/39?
You've mentioned that you became too strong for it. Maybe perservering with the 53/39 will be ok. give it a bit more time is my advice. there are some gearing tables that can give you an idea ow what the equivealent ratios are.http://twitter.com/mgalex
www.ogmorevalleywheelers.co.uk
10TT 24:36 25TT: 57:59 50TT: 2:08:11, 100TT: 4:30:05 12hr 204.... unfinished business0 -
Fit a 12/25 cassette and you should be fine. To be honest if you are training with racing groups and intend to road race then the lowest gearing you'll ever be able to get away within 99% of races is 39-25 anything lower and you'll be out the back before you can say "wait".I've changed to a compact for my main road bike this year - with the result that I've got better times in time trials than I have for over 5 years despite not really training properly for them,
Can't possibly see why this should make any difference either way provided that the gears used now are equivalent ratios to previous.0 -
eh wrote:I've changed to a compact for my main road bike this year - with the result that I've got better times in time trials than I have for over 5 years despite not really training properly for them,0
-
aracer wrote:jonty1977 wrote:Training with racing groups etc, they all said i was too strong for it and that it wouldn't do me any good long term.
Meanwhile I believe the British Crit championship was won by somebody on a compact a few years ago, and I doubt any of the people in your racing group are stronger than him. Personally as somebody not exceptionally strong, but a half decent club rider, I've changed to a compact for my main road bike this year - with the result that I've got better times in time trials than I have for over 5 years despite not really training properly for them, so it doesn't seem to have harmed me. I too spend most of my time in big ring on a compact - but I don't actually see what's wrong with that, the little ring being just for when it starts going up lots.
I'm with "a" on this one. Who among us can push a 50-11 or even a 50-12 for anything
more than downhill and maybe, just maybe a very hard, short sprint? Just to repeat
something that gets said a lot "a 50-11 is a taller gear than a 53-12". IMHO by switching
cranks you have gained nothing usable in the top end and have lost a really good set
of climbing gears. I vote for compact.
Dennis Noward0 -
To make a point, I have found that on TT's going from 53 12 on the flat to 53 13/14 has increased my pace and got me some PB's bigger rings aren't the best for everyone.
Find what's good for you and the terrain you ride.http://twitter.com/mgalex
www.ogmorevalleywheelers.co.uk
10TT 24:36 25TT: 57:59 50TT: 2:08:11, 100TT: 4:30:05 12hr 204.... unfinished business0 -
Well after a week on the rollers then a weekend of two rides totalling 180 miles over rolling terrain, I'm definitely coming to terms with the new chainring set up and starting to feel strong again.
Maybe it was the weeks holiday in Spain that had more effect on me rather than the change to 53/39 oops.0 -
TBH - I cant see that you can become 'too strong' for a compact. Old wives talk if you ask me.0
-
-
Agree with a and others.
It is utter rubbish to claim to be too strong for a compact./
Try doing the marmotte on 53/39, 12/21 and see how strong you are
It is more to do with gear ratios and the terrain you ride.
If your ride mostly on not too hilly terrain then you would have no problem with riding 53/39 but on other routes with steeper or longer climbs you would be better with compact.
On my new bike I chose a compact so I can use it for racing and hard sprotives lik ethe marmotte.
For racing I stick a straight through 12/21 , lowest gear 43" ( as earlier poster said 39 x 25 which is 42" is about as low as you will manage to stay in bunch with on climb), and for continental sportives I stick on 13/25. lowest 36.7" which I needed couple of times in Alps and Dolomites.
So far I have not striggled to keep up in races and did ok on all continental rides and at no time have I felt too strong for my compact, eepcially on the last 5km of the Gallibier :-)
So basically my advice for what it is worth would be to use a compact and have two cassettes. If not racing I would not even bother with 2.0 -
redddraggon wrote:Personally I think that 50 -> 34 is really uncomfortable and the 34 ring is useless except for decent climbs. Compacts should be more available in 50-36, god knows why they aren't.0
-
I would think a bigger cassette and more time on the bike will solve the issue. Perhaps a cog setup as large as 12/28 or even 12-13/30?0
-
It is not as simple as saying my hills bigger/steeper than yours since fitness and drafting make a huge impact. For instance even a 3rd cat rider will find 53/39 with a 12/25 block a really good set of gears, but if you just want to do individual enjoyable leisure rides in the Lakes then a compact would make way more sense.
However, I am surprised with the weight of modern bikes that most people find even 39-25 too hard, but maybe there are good reasons :?:
Maybe one day I'll let my sister know there are such things as compacts :twisted:0 -
jonty1977 wrote:Well after a week on the rollers then a weekend of two rides totalling 180 miles over rolling terrain, I'm definitely coming to terms with the new chainring set up and starting to feel strong again.
Maybe it was the weeks holiday in Spain that had more effect on me rather than the change to 53/39 oops.
Hi there.
While most of the advice above is good, no-one had picked up on your rollers comment. I find that it's relatively easy to spin out a 53x11 on the rollers, so it would be even more awkward to do quality intervals on rollers with compact gearing.
It's probably best (and easiest) sticking with what you've got. You can always fit a 27 on the back for days when you want an easier potter round the hills.
Cheers, Andy0 -
eh wrote:However, I am surprised with the weight of modern bikes that most people find even 39-25 too hard, but maybe there are good reasons :?0
-
I have a compact on my training bike, and a 53/39 on my time trial bike.
The TT bike with 53/39 has a 11-21 on it and unless its a hilly course im not out of the top ring, my cadence will average 95-100 over the course....
Now i wouldnt change off a compact on my main bike for anything though, except maybe a triple for a very close range cassette as i like to spin, as when im on that imnot going hell for leather on TT course,i willbe going up 10-15% hills, social rides etc, where having a lower spread is more suitable
As many have said,get gearing that is suitablefor you and your terrrain and dont worry about anyone else0 -
Decided to stick with the 53/39, feeling stronger with it now.
I'll keep the compact for when I'm back in the Alps0