Compact vs. Standard

giantsasquatch

andyp wrote:

giantsasquatch wrote:

Because they havent trained for higher cadence! It takes dedicated training. To beat peloton riders they would have to use very high cadence to match the speed of bigger rings. So they just improve on what they got. Several riders do ride compacts in fact.

Racing and enthusiast.pleasure cycling are 2 different things.

You said on page 1 that by having a compact you could beat the pros. Know your saying you can't. Which is it? .

Of course it is possible. It all down to the type of training. You already know of one that has won with a compact. So why the mystery? It was also a enthusiastic end comment as i proven compacts have more advantages especially if you not pro.

It down to individual taste and what suits your training.

Alot of serious riders haven't reached there full aerobic capacity potential due to poor training.

markos1963

giantsasquatch wrote:

Do you need a lesson in gear inches? You obviously don't grasp the basics.

No he doesn't and nor do I, you do. A compact is just a device to allow people to ride at the cadence they want to for a given level of fitness. A standard chainset does exactly the same and the same number of gear inches could be achieved by using an appropriate cassette. This blows your compact theory out of the water. Pro riders do ride at high cadences but on the lower ring, this allows the cruising speed to go up above 24 mph something a compact can't do, what a pro rider does have is a higher tolerance to latic acid and they achieve that by high output training that might or might not include high cadences. Unless you about to tell us that you are a cat1 racer or a sub 20 min TT'er or a gold standard sportive rider I think you need to finish this disscussion soon.

ride_whenever

The point i initially tried to make is that they are not universally better for people. For many people who cannot spin a huge gear they're great but for plenty of people spinnning a large gear is perfectly possible due to a moderate amount of conditioning. To really really spin fast you need a monstrous VO2 max.

amaferanga

giantsasquatch wrote:

....Alot of serious riders haven't reached there aerobic capacity potential due to poor training.

WTF does that have to do with a compact/standard double chainset though? Are you saying that all these people who have not reached their 'aerobic capacity potential' would do if they had a compact chainset.

Again, WTF?

giantsasquatch

I have summed up in a few sentances several times over of how compacts with the right gear ratios outweigh the benefits of standards(doubles).

Let's go again with a tiny few.

Go fast downhill
Go fast uphill
Go fast on the flat
Less muscle usage

Wow. Where's the problem?

Hmmm sounds ideal for training. Nahh i best have a standard because every tom dick and harry has one and it's the trend.

andyp

But you haven't done any of that. That's the point. :roll:

giantsasquatch

andyp wrote:

However, I'll not make claims based on them using unsourced quotes or try and dress up mumbo jumbo as science. That's where we differ I think.

I already said i read it long time ago. That is just one and only one quote. nothing wrong with that. If you want to write it off as cobblers then fine. I advised taking heed. I stand by everything i have said and back up anything said. I am guilty of not explaining good and my grammar is not great.

It all sounds lile you want to throw caution to the wind regarding heart health being older. I don't think thats very wise. I just erred on the side of caution.

markos1963

giantsasquatch wrote:

I have summed up in a few sentances several times over of how compacts with the right gear ratios outweigh the benefits of standards(doubles).

Let's go again with a tiny few.

Go fast downhill
Go fast uphill
Go fast on the flat
Less muscle usage

Wow. Where's the problem?

Hmmm sounds ideal for training. Nahh i best have a standard because every tom dick and harry has one and it's the trend.

FFS!! You get a 35 inch gear using a standard or a compact it makes no difference, the resistance is the same. Listen to what people are saying before we all come round and wrap a compact around your thick skull.

giantsasquatch

@markos1963

Of course you can i never said you can't. Now who's being a troll! Compacts keep the low and high gearing seperate. So with the ratios i prescribed(which are common knowledge with anybody with half an intelligence) you have high and low gearing for all situations.

35 inch gear is good for beginner. With the 11 which is 40 inch with the 52 that's low enough, that way you keep enough top end.

giantsasquatch

amaferanga wrote:

giantsasquatch wrote:

....Alot of serious riders haven't reached there aerobic capacity potential due to poor training.

WTF does that have to do with a compact/standard double chainset though? Are you saying that all these people who have not reached their 'aerobic capacity potential' would do if they had a compact chainset.

Again, WTF?

Not everybody can do high cadence because of health issues like there natural rhythm. By doing high cadence and intensive training you increasing your VO2 max. By building a bigger engine you increase aerobic capacity. You can't do it overnight.

redddraggon

giantsasquatch wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

giantsasquatch wrote:

....Alot of serious riders haven't reached there aerobic capacity potential due to poor training.

WTF does that have to do with a compact/standard double chainset though? Are you saying that all these people who have not reached their 'aerobic capacity potential' would do if they had a compact chainset.

Again, WTF?

Not everybody can do high cadence because of health issues like there natural rhythm. By doing high cadence and intensive training you increasing your VO2 max. By building a bigger engine you increase aerobic capacity. You can't do it overnight.

Are you a scientist?

AllTheGear

giantsasquatch wrote:

Go fast downhill
Go fast uphill
Go fast on the flat
Less muscle usage

I think you meant to post this in the bicycles vs. motorcycles thread.

FOAD

redddraggon wrote:

Are you a scientist?

Nope, just a bit of a knob who doesn't know when everyone is calling him one.

So to summarise, sasqui old science master, if I smoke to much, eat too much and am not capable of riding up a hill on a standard double I am more prone to having a heart attack...no really?

But by going for a compact in the ratios you suggest I will make it easier for myself for an extra few hundred yards until I am proper f****** anyway? Really, I never twigged that before, so well done.

I doubt anyone would buy anything you recommend given the level of your contradiction and BS on this thread, but you clearly believe yourself. I for one am crap at climbing long ascents, but I still went from a compact to a standard because the usability of it was better and it suited my type of riding. I am also a lot fitter and stronger as a result, whether it be climbing, sprinting or just averaging a good speed which I put down to stressing my body that bit more on climbs.

I better abandon my single speed 48 x 16 now though and the standard double as I am due a heart attack any time!

skinson

So, let me get this straight...................compact or double? :twisted:
Dave

giantsasquatch

redddraggon wrote:

Are you a scientist?

I'm a troll supposedly.

giantsasquatch

FOAD wrote:

redddraggon wrote:

Are you a scientist?

if I smoke to much, eat too much and am not capable of riding up a hill on a standard double I am more prone to having a heart attack.

But by going for a compact in the ratios you suggest I will make it easier for myself for an extra few hundred yards until I am proper f****** anyway? Really, I never twigged that before, so well done.

You obviously beyond help. read between the lines. All i said it can put severe undue stress on your heart and if it is suspect anyway then that is worse scenario. Who said it all about smoking and eating too much!

What ridiculous comment. How can high cadence make you proper f****** when you conserved your muscles more and trained your body to cope. If you got better aerobic capacity, developed slow twitch fibres you can go on and on with strengh to spare.

giantsasquatch

ride_whenever wrote:

The point i initially tried to make is that they are not universally better for people. For many people who cannot spin a huge gear they're great but for plenty of people spinnning a large gear is perfectly possible due to a moderate amount of conditioning. To really really spin fast you need a monstrous VO2 max.

See, that is why i suggested a compact in the first place, to establish better ground rules. If you 100% fit younger, healthy then you can at least try. If you can't do that, then it still suit for starting off.

Pross

giantsasquatch wrote:

Pross wrote:

Plenty of body builders die of heart problems

You could say the same thing about runners. Body builders die more from eating artificial protein powders(sick cows), overdosing, creatine etc that is very bad for the kidneys and contributes to all round bad health. If they ate natural protein like from eggs, beans they be better off.

Yes, but you are arguing that resistance training build a healthy heart muscle - must ask my local gym which peice of kit on the multi gym I need for my heart reps. The heart is strengthened by regular aerobic exercise. Obviously you need to build gradually rather than trying to sprint up hill on a 53 x 12 gear straight away. However, if you try to ride up a hill at 15mph on 34 x 27 you would be equally as likely to have a heart attack as doing the same on say 39 x 17.

Pross

giantsasquatch wrote:

Ok follow the crowd and get a standard. Several have knocked me then said they got a compact. lol

What parts do you have issue with?

People aren't knocking your advice on compacts, personally I think a 50 / 36 chainset offers the best adaptability paired with a reasonably close ratio rear such as 11 or 12 / 23 or 25. It's pretty simple to start with a 34 if you aren't confident in your climbing and then switch to a 36 as your fitness improves by which time you should be able to pedal 36 x 25 comfortably up most hills.

giantsasquatch

markos1963 wrote:

giantsasquatch wrote:

Do you need a lesson in gear inches? You obviously don't grasp the basics.

No he doesn't and nor do I, you do. A compact is just a device to allow people to ride at the cadence they want to for a given level of fitness. A standard chainset does exactly the same and the same number of gear inches could be achieved by using an appropriate cassette. This blows your compact theory out of the water. Pro riders do ride at high cadences but on the lower ring, this allows the cruising speed to go up above 24 mph something a compact can't do, what a pro rider does have is a higher tolerance to latic acid and they achieve that by high output training that might or might not include high cadences. Unless you about to tell us that you are a cat1 racer or a sub 20 min TT'er or a gold standard sportive rider I think you need to finish this disscussion soon.

Let's safely assume the OP is not a pro by the law of averages of asking that question, a compact would benefit him better than a double, as it has been said by countless others. for the benefit of beginner or training. Once he gets to a super level of fitness then he can decide himself what's best but until that time, a compact is ideal. Training with a compact would help build up resistance to lactic acid better.

giantsasquatch

ride_whenever wrote:

How does a hill magically make it harder on your heart. If you put out a reasonably consistent power in any one cadence, then you change gears and go faster down hills and on the flats then slower up the hills. You heartrate stays pretty constant.

The side comment on hilly heart stuff was suggesting if you suddenly go up massive hill and you not used to it, say you conditioned to flats. It is sudden exertion your heart is not used to.

Pross

The factor that determines how much fitter you get is based on how hard you are working (i.e. power output / heart rate). Most training is a mix of longer, lower intensity efforts or short, sharp efforts which improve different facets of your overall fitness and strength. Cadence has little to do with it, you may be putting in the same effort spinning fast as you are grinding a big gear. However, using a lower gear to achieve the same power output will do less damage to muscles and also keep you more supple. Strain on your heart will be determined by your workload. So, if you are riding at a heart rate of 150bpm on a 90 inch gear you are straining your heart less than if you were spinning a 70 inch gear with an HR of 160bpm. I don't think anyone is arguing that it isn't beneficial to spin but to say it is better for your heart is clearly wrong.

Pross

giantsasquatch wrote:

Why would i make it up??? I remember reading about long time ago that is why i mentioned it. All i was suggesting was for older cyclists to take care. How is that crap advice?

You can take advice or ignore it. I am just quoting what was said. For every pro argument you will always find a counter argument such is the way. Unless you into science, you don't see the light.

At the end of the day you ride what you want. Everybody has individual tastes, live in different terrain and have personal requirements.

I wasn't recommeding a standard compact 50/34 i was recommending a 52/36 so you have big gears as well.! You probably outgrow the 50/34. A 10 spd cassette coupled with the 11-25 means the gear ratios will be close together in ranges you will use. I am not saying it will suit everybody. I am saying its top damn good combination to have if you live in hilly/flat areas.

Who's going to tell me 52/11 isn't big enough? Nobody

If you got the big gears for the flats, downhill and the small gears for higher cadence up the hills then thats an advantage. If you can't see that then that's your problem. I suggested the best combination to keep the ratios tighter as well. I tried to help. Sorry.

Can you use a 36t on the same chainset as a 52t? I thought the minimum with a 52 or 53 was a 38t?

DVV

giantsasquatch, can you explain or define the law of averages to me? I often hear people use this phrase but do not know what it means.

DVV

I think on a compact the difference in teeth between rings is the important bit - it can be 16 max, so 50/34 or 52/36 for example.

giantsasquatch

If your older and the body is not preconditioned to that particular exercise and you go nuts doing that exercise ie. massive exertion. Hammering up a hill giving it your all is risky. There is a better and safer way. Why be so knackered when you get to the top? On a giant hill, you would use up all the fast twitch.

Wave to the man on the compact as he comes merrily by you.

AllTheGear

Except there's no difference in hammering it up a hill, hammering it on the flat, or hammering it down a hill.

giantsasquatch

Pross wrote:

Can you use a 36t on the same chainset as a 52t? I thought the minimum with a 52 or 53 was a 38t?

Yes. 52/36 is a non standard compact.

amaferanga

giantsasquatch wrote:

If your older and the body is not preconditioned to that particular exercise and you go nuts doing that exercise ie. massive exertion. Hammering up a hill giving it your all is risky. There is a better and safer way. Why be so knackered when you get to the top? A giant hill you would use up all the fast twitch.

Wave to the man on the compact as he comes merrily by you.

I thought that your basic assumption was that people will ride up hills slower if they have lower gears thereby stressing the heart less, but now you're saying that poeple will actually ride faster with a compact. Now I'm no scientist (well actually I am ) but it doesn't take a scientist to understand that if you get up the hill faster then you're churning out a greater power, your body is working harder and hence your heart is more stressed.

AllTheGear

giantsasquatch wrote:

Pross wrote:

Can you use a 36t on the same chainset as a 52t? I thought the minimum with a 52 or 53 was a 38t?

Yes. 52/36 is a non standard compact.

There may be people making buying decisions based onwhat is said here. I don't think you really know if that combination is usable. Normally the two rings are designed as a pair, so the clocking is synchronised at the change points. If you go from a 34/50 to 36/50 you would normally change the 50 ring as well, because it will come with the pins, ramps etc. set up to suit one particular inner ring.