road gears, why only two chainrings
Comments
-
that would be most sensible as you say but since the beginning of time chains havent been able to work at severe angles reliably neither can they get much thinner. i can only see more compromises to make it work. also rear wheel dish is a limiting factor.neeb wrote:
It's the logical next step with the increasing trend towards more cogs at the back, narrower chains, and more flexible chains capable of accepting a wider chainline. Multiple front chainrings (with the associated clunky changers) have always been clumsy and inefficient. It would save weight too. The current standard double arrangement is a hangover from an era when we had only 5 cogs at the back. With 1 or 2 more cogs at the back the most sensible thing to do would be to have a single chainring at the front with doubles offered as an option the same way that triples are now.id like to see pigs fly.0 -
I think and hope that the future looks like Sheldon Brown's 63-speed: http://sheldonbrown.org/otb.html (3 at the front, 7 at the back, 3 in the hub)."We're not holding up traffic. We are traffic."0
-
Chickenfeed, with a triple, 11 speed block and Rohloff 14 speed hub you could have a 462 speed.msw wrote:I think and hope that the future looks like Sheldon Brown's 63-speed: http://sheldonbrown.org/otb.html (3 at the front, 7 at the back, 3 in the hub).0 -
It may feel you are going slower on a double due to the cadence but you are probably going faster than you would be in an MTB granny ring. Also, climbing off road you quite often need to be able to stay seated to keep weight on the back wheel and maintain traction whereas on the road this isn't such an issue so you can get out of the saddle to put a bit of extra power down. That said most of the major road bike manufacturers offer a triple option on their road bikes other than those aimed at the racing market. If you wanted to race on a 30t chainring you would really have to pedal to keep up.0
-
53/39 is fine for anything in the uk if you are fit.
So what's your cadence when you're on a 10% climb then?! And how do you define 'fit'?0 -
indeed, even thou im only 20 and iv been on a road bike for half a year and iv been riding mtbs for a gd 14 years on and off id say u must be quiet a weak hill climber:P you shouldnt need a triple to go up hills imo they are pretty useless( ino il get flamed for that remark:P) also i agree with both things u said:) i can manage 25% hills with a double lolredddraggon wrote:surreyxc wrote:I can get up the hills but it so slow literally having to stamp on each pedal stroke.
Sounds like you are just poor at climbingdanowat wrote:If you have serious hills on your cycles, then you should have got a triple .
I manage in the Peak District and North Wales just fine with only two chainrings. Triples are largely overkill unless you are touring.best bike: raleigh avanti U6 carbon comp
10m tt pb:23:42.
25m tt pb: 1h 2min( only done 2)0 -
masterchef wrote:
indeed, even thou im only 20 and iv been on a road bike for half a year and iv been riding mtbs for a gd 14 years on and off id say u must be quiet a weak hill climber:P you shouldnt need a triple to go up hills imo they are pretty useless( ino il get flamed for that remark:P) also i agree with both things u said:) i can manage 25% hills with a double lolredddraggon wrote:surreyxc wrote:I can get up the hills but it so slow literally having to stamp on each pedal stroke.
Sounds like you are just poor at climbingdanowat wrote:If you have serious hills on your cycles, then you should have got a triple .
I manage in the Peak District and North Wales just fine with only two chainrings. Triples are largely overkill unless you are touring.
Yet writing in English is a struggle. I guess you can't be good at everything...0 -
yes it is, you cant be gd at everything...best bike: raleigh avanti U6 carbon comp
10m tt pb:23:42.
25m tt pb: 1h 2min( only done 2)0 -
redddraggon wrote:surreyxc wrote:I can get up the hills but it so slow literally having to stamp on each pedal stroke.
Sounds like you are just poor at climbingdanowat wrote:If you have serious hills on your cycles, then you should have got a triple .
I manage in the Peak District and North Wales just fine with only two chainrings. Triples are largely overkill unless you are touring.
Experience and hind sight are great thing. I bought an old Peugeot with Shimano 105 and a double on the front. Thought I'd done my research and bought a reasonably well specced bike at a reasonable price to get me going, What I hadn't realised was what a 52, 42 chainring with an 11, 21 actually meant, especially when you tackle hills around Emily Moor or Halifax.
Maybe I was poor at hill climbing to start with, but this set up didn't help and the 1 minute cycle that I took the bike for a test ride, didn't show me what the gear set up meant.0 -
42-21 is a killer. Most modern road bikes will have 39-25 as standard. You have a massive gear for your lower gear and I would suggest getting a new cassette with at least a 25 cog. But, the 42 inner ring is a challenge. Not my idea of a decent gearing.0
-
Thank you for Cervelors for you response. Having bought the bike and used it and learnt quite a but about bikes and gears I agree with you. However, do I need to go compact of standard double? Can you help me.My question is will I notice a significant difference just changing to 39 and will I feel as though I am overpedalling on a compact with only a 50 outer? Not sure which one to buy. I'm looking at something like an 11/12 -25 cassette.0
-
Not sure which one to buy
The trouble is that everyone will have their own opinions.
That said, the difference between 42/21 and 39/25 will be significant - 39/27 or 28 even more. The best thing would be to experiment yourself. It may not be the cheapest option, as you might be buying and rejecting but at least you get to know what suits you.0 -
The OP reminds me of when I bought my first road bike (15+years ago) to use for training in the winter (ready for MTB races in the summer)
Back then I was young, fit and thought I was the DBs on a Marin Pine Mountain, I didn't even realise that road bikes had different size wheels let alone gears. :oops:
Flippin heck that first ride was a lesson in humility! Not to mention a realisation that road biking is for real men.
It only took a few weeks to get used to it though (living in the Fens helped) and the following summer my race times show a massive improvement - I don't even run a triple on my MTB now.
My advice is persevere, in a few weeks you'll be fine and think MTBing is too easy to bother with anymore
Basso Astra
Principia Ellipse SX
Kinesis Racelight 4S
Kinesis Crosslight Pro Disc0 -
If you are very fit, maybe not, but the original quote didn't mention a compact set-up.rake wrote:
The Milk Race went up that climb years ago on good old macho gears and half the riders ended up falling off still strapped into their pedals... 0 -
0
-
Teach wrote:Thank you for Cervelors for you response. Having bought the bike and used it and learnt quite a but about bikes and gears I agree with you. However, do I need to go compact of standard double? Can you help me.My question is will I notice a significant difference just changing to 39 and will I feel as though I am overpedalling on a compact with only a 50 outer? Not sure which one to buy. I'm looking at something like an 11/12 -25 cassette.
what sort of rider are you ? How well built are you and what are you like on hills at the moment. It all depends on what sort of core strength you have to start with to work out if a standard double or compact is best0 -
sherer wrote:Teach wrote:Thank you for Cervelors for you response. Having bought the bike and used it and learnt quite a but about bikes and gears I agree with you. However, do I need to go compact of standard double? Can you help me.My question is will I notice a significant difference just changing to 39 and will I feel as though I am overpedalling on a compact with only a 50 outer? Not sure which one to buy. I'm looking at something like an 11/12 -25 cassette.
what sort of rider are you ? How well built are you and what are you like on hills at the moment. It all depends on what sort of core strength you have to start with to work out if a standard double or compact is best
I'm new to cycling, but used to do a lot of swimming. Haven't exercised enough i the last 10 years, but come from a competitive background, and even though I am not as fit as I should be I wont get off a bike and walk, I just dig deeper. Hills are definitely hard work and at times I'm standing on the pedals to keep them turning. Core strength not bad, just carrying a bit of extra weight at the moment.
I don't fully understand rations
If I get a 39 inner with say a 27 cassette how different is that to a compact with a 25 cassette?0 -
Check out Sheldon Brown on gear ratios for a full answer, but here's how I see it:Teach wrote:I don't fully understand rations
If I get a 39 inner with say a 27 cassette how different is that to a compact with a 25 cassette?
Just divide front cog by back cog & compare the answers.
39/27 = 1.44
34/25 = 1.36
Bigger answer means higher gear: if you want to know how much higher, divide the two answers to work out the percentage difference:
1.44/1.36 = 1.059 which means 39/27 is a 5.9% higher ratio
But in the end numbers are just numbers, you need to ride different set-ups to see how they feel.
FWIW I would say that the de facto standard these days (50/34 compact, 12-25 block) really should do everyone for pretty much every eventuality except serious racing sprints (>35mph) and touring up long steep hills with a loaded bike.
Bit it's still a matter of personal preference - your gears do not define your manhood.0 -
Thank you bopington that makes sense.0
-
Fwiw when I changed from a 39:23 to a 39:27 (a change of approx 15%) it made a big enough difference to me to be able to climb hills I couldn't do before.
If you're really struggling a gearing change of less than 10% will hardly be noticeable.
There's two climbs I like to do here; one is ~50 mins and from 8 - 15% and the other is ~ 14 mins and 10-15%. I couldn't risk them before (knees) but now do them happily (well, not that happy). I swear a lot but I can do them as long as I stand on pedals.0 -
Teach wrote:redddraggon wrote:surreyxc wrote:I can get up the hills but it so slow literally having to stamp on each pedal stroke.
Sounds like you are just poor at climbingdanowat wrote:If you have serious hills on your cycles, then you should have got a triple .
I manage in the Peak District and North Wales just fine with only two chainrings. Triples are largely overkill unless you are touring.
Experience and hind sight are great thing. I bought an old Peugeot with Shimano 105 and a double on the front. Thought I'd done my research and bought a reasonably well specced bike at a reasonable price to get me going, What I hadn't realised was what a 52, 42 chainring with an 11, 21 actually meant, especially when you tackle hills around Emily Moor or Halifax.
Maybe I was poor at hill climbing to start with, but this set up didn't help and the 1 minute cycle that I took the bike for a test ride, didn't show me what the gear set up meant.
If you get up to the Emily Moor transmitter on 42/21 you're doing well, it's 20% going up there.
I don't get why people moan about having a double or compact. If you can't get up hills on the compact, then train more, cause you will get up them eventually.
When I got my first decent road bike, it had 34/25 gears on, and I was umming and arring, cause I had 34/32 on my previous road bike, I had to get off and walk up a 30% max climb called Boltby Bank. Abit of training and I got up Rosedale Chimney on 34/25.
Resorting to sticking a triple on is just no good, taking the easy option out, and people expect to get better spinning like mad going backwards on a triple.0
