Struggling with a double

nigelgos

Santa brought me a double chainset (despite my email giving clear instructions on selecting the 50/34 from the options at Merlin ).

I mostly use my my bike for commuting and I'm fine with the double for that. I also use the bike for touring (mostly around Huddersfield/Peak District area) and I now struggle up the steeper gradients. It's not that I can't get up them it's just that my cadence drops using the double. I've given it a go since Christmas but I definitely feel I could do with a lower gear or two.

So options from cheapest first...

1) MTFU

2) New cassette either a 27 or 28, though I like the closeness of the 12-25 :-/

*34 (12-25) This is what I had before the upgrades.
12 13 14 15 17 19 21 23 25
5.7 5.3 4.9 4.6 4.0 3.6 3.3 3.0 2.7

*39 (12-25) This is what I currently have.
12 13 14 15 16 17 19 21 23 25
6.6 6.1 5.6 5.2 4.9 4.6 4.1 3.7 3.4 3.1

*39 (12-27)
12 13 14 15 16 17 19 21 24 27
6.6 6.1 5.6 5.2 4.9 4.6 4.1 3.7 3.3 2.9

*39 (12-28)
12 13 14 15 16 17 19 22 25 28
6.6 6.1 5.6 5.2 4.9 4.6 4.1 3.6 3.1 2.8

3) Buy a compact and sell the double. I like the top gear that a 53x12 gives me though. I guess I could always put an 11-25 on a compact.

I'm thinking maybe option 3 to be honest.

bernithebiker

I would vote 3) every time.

slowbike

What hills? length & gradient? and what cadence do you drop to?

IMHO
MTFU isn't an option - you need to work to that level - jumping from a 34/25 @ 36" to 39/25 @ 41" - you're losing 2 bottom gears you had before ...
a 39/27 would give you 38" which is midway (and what I've got atm)
a 39/28 would give you 37" - so closest to what you had without having to change the crankset.

What were the hills like before you got the new bike? Did you find you didn't use the easiest gears much?
I changed from a 34/50 28-11 to 39/53 27-12. The crankset change was because I wanted the compact for my wifes bike and I wasn't using the 34 ring much. The 28-11 cassette went with it because I didn't use the 34/28 combo much and I got a 27-12 one off here quite cheaply - I've tested it up some of the steep hills around here and I can ride them. I'm not worried about the longer shallower gradients that we have plenty of.

Of course, the easy answer is to sell the double and buy a compact - but by the looks of things you won't get much for the double and have to pay more for the compact ... what's the difference between that or a new cassette?

brownbosh

12-27, see if you get on with it. If not you haven't lost anything because it will still be useable with any other chainset you MAY have to buy later. Cheapest best guess without knowing you.

Grill

Option 3. No recreational cyclist needs larger than a compact unless they happen to live in Florida.

maltloaf_df

I went from a triple to a compact when I changed bikes and havent looked back.

50/34 on the front and 12/30 on the back I find to be the perfect spread - at least until I manage to shift some weight. 34/30 allows me to spin up most inclines.

so, +1 for buying a compact

ai_1

I think a compact is nearly always the right answer.
Whereas MTFU is almost never the right answer.


maltloaf_df - I'm on a triple now that gives me 30/27 as my smallest gear. I've just ordered a new bike with a compact 50/34 & 11-28 cassette. I expect I'll be fine with the 34/28 ratio on all but a couple of 15%+ gradients I sometimes ride. I'll get up those but it may be tough! However the new Ultegra wide range rear derailleur will be available if I ever find I need a 30 or 32 at the back.

On the topic of weight that maltloaf mentioned:
I have maybe 8kg excess weight that I could do with losing and I'll still be far from the ideal skinny climber physique. Weight does make a huge difference on steep climbs, a fact some 65kg cyclists choose to ignore when they tell you that anyone should be able to get up a 15% gradient with 34/25 or even 39/27. At 88kg with a 9kg bike I'm doing 35% more work for a given gradient at a given speed compared to a 65kg cyclist on a 7kg bike. That's a massive difference and while a lot of my extra weight may be muscle, I don't have 35% more heart and lungs. So, I'm going to be slower up those climbs and correspondingly I'll either have to live with a very low cadence or have a more suitable gear ratio. Many of those who trot out MTFU on these topics don't take account of the fact that the terrain is the same for all of us but 15% for me is equivalent to 20% for them.
Suggesting I should be fine with 34/25 is like suggesting that 65kg rider should be able for 39/21. Ever seen a cyclist use 39/21 up a steep gradient voluntarily?

markhewitt1978

Put in the compact and sell the double before it gets too worn. Doubles have little use for anyone except racing types.

northpole

Compact. Simples.

Peter

sloppyschleckonds

nigelgos wrote:

I've given it a go since Christmas but I definitely feel I could do with a lower gear or two.

You'll probably be saying the same when you fit a compact.

Grill

I recently put an 11-32 on my Ritchey and rode Penrhys with one lung over the weekend (chest infection- not the best idea), and couldn't believe how easy it was to get up in a 34-32. I only tried it for a couple hundred yards and then felt guilty so shifted up. Spinning is definitely winning.

Serious Cat

Grill wrote:

Option 3. No recreational cyclist needs larger than a compact unless they happen to live in Florida.

This ^

Cathalnoel69

had the same dilemma until I fitted a 12-28 recently and its been a huge success, if you check out Sheldon browns calculator you'll see that 39-28 gives you the same bottom gear as 34-25

Sprool

I've been looking into options on a new bike recently. What interests me (being used to a 52/39/30 triple with 11-28 cassette) is not going for a compact 50/34 (where your top gear 50/11 is worse than the old triple) but putting a wider range cassette on with a double, e.g. 11 - 32 with a 52-36 double.
That way I can maintain the very high gear and get low enough with the 36/32 pairing to get up the steepest inclines round here. With a compact 50/34 the lowest gear combo of 34/32 is just a little bit too low.
With a compact 5-/34 and the 11-28 cassette the lowest gear is a bit much for the big climbs.
I think standard double and wide range cassette is the way to go for me round my home area. (Holme Moss, Wessenden, Dovestone)

me-109

Serious Cat wrote:

Grill wrote:

Option 3. No recreational cyclist needs larger than a compact unless they happen to live in Florida.

This ^

Are you sure? Those sinkholes take some climbing out of. :-)

vecfluxx

I would go with a compact and 12-25, do you really need 50/11? I miss having the 16 a lot more.

nigelgos

Ordered a new compact and I've put the double up on the classified section (viewtopic.php?f=40091&t=12958061&p=18732203#p18732203).

I seemed to get heel rub quite quickly on the chainset. Has anyone tried helitape on a chainset before?

markhewitt1978

Cathalnoel69 wrote:

had the same dilemma until I fitted a 12-28 recently and its been a huge success, if you check out Sheldon browns calculator you'll see that 39-28 gives you the same bottom gear as 34-25

Since 34/25 is way too high a gear for me that wouldn't work!

DeVlaeminck

Figure out the lowest gear you need - if you can get that with a double and a 28 cassette I'd keep the double - assuming you have already fitted it. If you feel you need a compact after that then nothing lost as you'd have needed the 28 cassette with the compact to give you lower gears than you'd have with a compact and a tighter ratio cassette.