53/39 Ultegra 6800 to 52x36
casatikid
Posts: 229
I don't want to open up a whole can of worms here but im seeking advice from other users.
Im currently using 53/39 on all my bikes , however I ride a lot of hilly sportives in and around the North Yorkshire area and I see that many other riders are using compacts these days.
Im seriously considering dropping down the the so called Pro compact of 52x36. In the opinion of those that ride with this combination, will I notice any real benefit? I don't want to go down the road of a smaller chainset?
Im currently using 53/39 on all my bikes , however I ride a lot of hilly sportives in and around the North Yorkshire area and I see that many other riders are using compacts these days.
Im seriously considering dropping down the the so called Pro compact of 52x36. In the opinion of those that ride with this combination, will I notice any real benefit? I don't want to go down the road of a smaller chainset?
0
Comments
-
53/39 on all my bikers in Britain, 52/36 on my bike in the Abruzzo mountains: can't feel a jot of difference.
Nada. Rien. Zilch. Pas de tout.Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am
De Sisti wrote:
This is one of the silliest threads I've come across.
Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honoursmithy21 wrote:
He's right you know.0 -
Hard to say, if we don't know what cassette you're using.
If you already have a 28-12 (or 11) and you're finding it tough to keep a high cadence up the steepest climbs, then there is definitely sense in going from 39 to 36.
If however you currently use a 23-12 (or 11) then it's easier to just put on a wider ranging cassette when you hit the hills.
You'd be hard pushed to notice the difference between 52 and 53.
Climbing is my forte, and I use a 50-36, coupled with either a 28-11 (mountainous) or 23-11 (rolling). Using the 11 means you can keep up with the 53 boys when caning it downhill.0 -
Hi thanks for the replies.
I don't have trouble getting up the climbs, I just thought it would make life easier for me using a 52/36 as im now an old man of 60 but according to you guys there really isnt much of a difference .Looks like I would be wasting my time unless I change to a full compact.
Oh by the way,i use a 12x28 at the moment.0 -
I wouldn't bother going 52/36 to tell the truth - it's only on there because I got the crank set ridiculously cheap.
Re compact - I can see the point to a certain extent - I have one on the summer fast commuter/trainer but I just tend to end up riding big ring/high up the cassette everywhere and finding the small ring just too small for my style of riding.
Some people swear by them, but for me: trad 53/39.Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am
De Sisti wrote:
This is one of the silliest threads I've come across.
Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honoursmithy21 wrote:
He's right you know.0 -
At the age of 60, you have to accept that your speed and strength are declining every year - and this decline accelerates as you get past 60. Figures vary but some studies suggest you lose 0.7 per cent every year, or 6-8 per cent per decade. As a competitive runner, I realise it's an inescapable fact of life that my times are just that bit slower every year. My consolation is that it's the same for all my rivals. Training helps to reduce the decline.
Lowering your gears will enable you to enjoy those hilly rides as you get older. Younger riders may boast about being able to ride uphill on standard doubles. But the older you get, the more you risk injury and exhaustion trying to emulate them. Spinning lower gears is the way to combat old age decline.
I'm 62 and have moved from 53/39 to 50/36 and now 50/34 over the last 10 years or so. I use a 12-29 Campag cassette. Like Berni, I'm a natural climber. The change has been well worth it for me as I live in a hilly area on the English/Welsh border and take my cycling holidays in the Alps and Pyrenees. You will notice a benefit moving from 53/39 to 52/36 on the hills - particularly long climbs and at the end of a long day - and you will notice even more difference going to 50/34. If I lived in the rolling terrain of the east of England and never rode in mountains, I'd still be on 53/39. It all depends what sort of riding you do.0 -
At the age of 60, you have to accept that your speed and strength are declining every year - and this decline accelerates as you get past 60. Figures vary but some studies suggest you lose 0.7 per cent every year, or 6-8 per cent per decade. As a competitive runner, I realise it's an inescapable fact of life that my times are just that bit slower every year. My consolation is that it's the same for all my rivals. Training helps to reduce the decline.
Lowering your gears will enable you to enjoy those hilly rides as you get older. Younger riders may boast about being able to ride uphill on standard doubles. But the older you get, the more you risk injury and exhaustion trying to emulate them. Spinning lower gears is the way to combat old age decline.
I'm 62 and have moved from 53/39 to 50/36 and now 50/34 over the last 10 years or so. I use a 12-29 Campag cassette. Like Berni, I'm a natural climber. The change has been well worth it for me as I live in a hilly area on the English/Welsh border and take my cycling holidays in the Alps and Pyrenees. You will notice a benefit moving from 53/39 to 52/36 on the hills - particularly long climbs and at the end of a long day - and you will notice even more difference going to 50/34. If I lived in the rolling terrain of the east of England and never rode in mountains, I'd still be on 53/39. It all depends what sort of riding you do.
Fair do's, I'm only 51, so I've a few years in the bag yet. To be honest I might take up golf when I get slower.
Plenty of years yet for you to keep on cycling, Joe. I think the secret is to keep on doing it - and forget the golf! One of my occasional cycling companions, who still keeps up a cracking pace at the age of 87, was the first man over 80 to do under the hour in a 25-mile time trial and still holds three national age records for the distance. Even he, however, accepts the passage of time and has bought an electric bike for getting up the hills near his holiday retreat in the West Indies.0 -
And that my friends neatly sums up why I will never bother putting on a number.One of my occasional cycling companions, who still keeps up a cracking pace at the age of 87, was the first man over 80 to do under the hour in a 25-mile time trial ....
Chapeau!The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
It really depends on who you are, where you ride and for how long. I don't see much point in having gearing much lower than you need any more than not low enough, and long alpine climbs are very different to the short steep stuff we have a lot of here; likewise a ride with a couple of hills thrown in isn't the same as the Fred Whitton. I did Buttertubs and some others last summer on a lowest gear of 39x20 (and a 11kg bike), and was a tad overgeared; I think if I'd had a 26t I would have been much happier, but if I went to the Alps, I'd want a compact. If you are happy with the gearing you have, stick with it; and if not, switch to compact.0
-
Fair point.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19759396#p19759396]Simon Masterson[/url] wrote:If you are happy with the gearing you have, stick with it; and if not, switch to compact.
If you are going to change, make it a worthwhile one. Why bother otherwise?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I like 52/36, came down from a 53/39 that needed replacing and certainly appreciate the 36t.0
-
I moved from 53/39 to 52/36 ( use an 11-28 cassette) and really like it.
The 52 means you can stay on the big ring when its rolling territory
The 36 just makes those steeper climbs a touch easier and allows you to spin.
I also cant be bothered messing with gearing if I am in the Peak or Wales so this set up does me for everything0 -
I'm with iPete & MikeWW.
52/36 gives you enough in the big ring for the more rolling stuff and eases the little ring too. (I have an 11-28 on the back) which has been fine riding Dorset's hills and fine in the Alps.0 -
There really isn't enough difference between 53t and 52t to enable you to stay in the big ring longer.0
-
You'd get a bigger benefit getting an 11-32 cog cassette out back and a long cage rear mech. Cheaper too, without getting the big drop from a 52 to 36 which personally I really don't like. You obviously have to compromise with the slightly larger jumps out back but for me it's a better compromise and you get to keep the downhill/tailwind/fast group ride gears
0 -
You'd get a bigger benefit getting an 11-32 cog cassette out back and a long cage rear mech. Cheaper too, without getting the big drop from a 52 to 36 which personally I really don't like. You obviously have to compromise with the slightly larger jumps out back but for me it's a better compromise and you get to keep the downhill/tailwind/fast group ride gears
Why not just go 50-36? A 50-11 is more than fast enough for 99% of riding in the UK.0 -
I would disagree Bernie, but it depends if you like to push on downhill, preferred cadence, who you ride with etc. Admittedly the descents in the UK are much shorter than dropping off the Alps or something like though
I was thinking the OP already has the chainset and it was cheaper to replace the cassette and rear mech which also gives a slightly easier gear for the steep stuff. 50/36 does give the same drop in teeth so I can see where you are coming from though - i'd much prefer that to a full or mid compact up front.0 -
110-120rpm on 50x11 gets you fast enough that you're probably better off not pedalling.0
-
Maybe, but lots of people prefer to spin at 80 or 90 rpm. It just depends on the OPs riding style and terrain - always nice to have a choice 0
-
If you are doing 90 rpm on a 53x11 then you shouldn't be wasting your time on here. :PMaybe, but lots of people prefer to spin around 80-90The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
We are talking about downhill here, unless Tony Martin is in da house0
-
Even then, 90 rpm = 36 mph = coasting on a descent for most.We are talking about downhill here, unless Tony Martin is in da houseThe above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Maybe, but lots of people prefer to spin at 80 or 90 rpm. It just depends on the OPs riding style and terrain - always nice to have a choice
A lot of people aren't very fit and can't pedal fast enough. If all you can manage is 80-90rpm, having a 52-53t isn't going to make much difference unless you have a very different idea of 'pushing on descents' to the rest of us.0 -
I prefer 52/36 to anything else. I ride with a 12-25 and this allows me a nice close ratio so I don't get big jumps between gears. I've not found a hill I can't climb on 36-25 or a route where 52-12 wasn't big enough
Of course there is a difference between 39 and 36 little ring. Anyone says there isn't is talking twaddle.
If you want to up your cadence up the hills then yes, swap it out. Maybe even try the 36 with the 53 for a while, it'll work fine. You can pick up a 36 for £25. Try SJS Cycles first for that.2020 Reilly Spectre - raw titanium
2020 Merida Reacto Disc Ltd - black on black
2015 CAAD8 105 - very green - stripped to turbo bike
2018 Planet X Exocet 2 - grey
The departed:
2017 Cervelo R3 DI2 - sold
Boardman CX Team - sold
Cannondale Synapse - broken
Cube Streamer - stolen
Boardman Road Comp - stolen0 -
I prefer 52/36 to anything else. I ride with a 12-25 and this allows me a nice close ratio so I don't get big jumps between gears. I've not found a hill I can't climb on 36-25 or a route where 52-12 wasn't big enough
Of course there is a difference between 39 and 36 little ring. Anyone says there isn't is talking twaddle.
If you want to up your cadence up the hills then yes, swap it out. Maybe even try the 36 with the 53 for a while, it'll work fine. You can pick up a 36 for £25. Try SJS Cycles first for that.
For me, the big problem with a compact set-up, 52/36 or 50/34, is the big drop between the chainrings, necessitating up to 3 changes in the sprockets. On a 53/42 there is an almost seamless shift when changing chainrings. 42/30 is the same ratio as 36/25 with the advantage of more efficient bigger rings, and you can ride on the inner chaining, not just climb - 42x16 is a nice gear.
True, but with a 12-30 on the back you will have huge gaps between gears and be fishing around all the time trying to find one offering you the right cadence. Each to their own, but I prefer a close ratio. I ride the 52 for 80% of the time and stick it in the 36 for the steeper stuff or prolonged riding where I know I wont be over 20mph for a while
Edit to say I'm not trying to say I'm the strongest or the fastest or whatever, I'm genuinely not. My point is a choice between close ratio cassette or bigger chain rings2020 Reilly Spectre - raw titanium
2020 Merida Reacto Disc Ltd - black on black
2015 CAAD8 105 - very green - stripped to turbo bike
2018 Planet X Exocet 2 - grey
The departed:
2017 Cervelo R3 DI2 - sold
Boardman CX Team - sold
Cannondale Synapse - broken
Cube Streamer - stolen
Boardman Road Comp - stolen0 -
I prefer 52/36 to anything else. I ride with a 12-25 and this allows me a nice close ratio so I don't get big jumps between gears. I've not found a hill I can't climb on 36-25 or a route where 52-12 wasn't big enough
Of course there is a difference between 39 and 36 little ring. Anyone says there isn't is talking twaddle.
If you want to up your cadence up the hills then yes, swap it out. Maybe even try the 36 with the 53 for a while, it'll work fine. You can pick up a 36 for £25. Try SJS Cycles first for that.
For me, the big problem with a compact set-up, 52/36 or 50/34, is the big drop between the chainrings, necessitating up to 3 changes in the sprockets. On a 53/42 there is an almost seamless shift when changing chainrings. 42/30 is the same ratio as 36/25 with the advantage of more efficient bigger rings, and you can ride on the inner chaining, not just climb - 42x16 is a nice gear.
True, but with a 12-30 on the back you will have huge gaps between gears and be fishing around all the time trying to find one offering you the right cadence. Each to their own, but I prefer a close ratio. I ride the 52 for 80% of the time and stick it in the 36 for the steeper stuff or prolonged riding where I know I wont be over 20mph for a while
Edit to say I'm not trying to say I'm the strongest or the fastest or whatever, I'm genuinely not. My point is a choice between close ratio cassette or bigger chain rings
No huge gaps, 11 speed: 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-24-27-30.
It's the 'prolonged riding where you know you won't be over 20mph for a while' when it's lovely to have a 42.
Reading this article: http://cyclingtips.com.au/2009/10/the-42t-chainring persuaded me to try a bigger inner ring. I accept that Tom Southam is a stronger cyclist than most on here, that's why I fitted a 30 sprocket.
That sounds quite gappy to me.
You have 3 x 3 tooth gaps and 2 x 2 tooth. Compared to my 23-11 which has just 1 x 2 tooth gap.
If you were climbing a col like Ventoux say, I think it likely you'd struggle to stay in your 'best' or 'target' cadence.
To my mind, my 36 is for proper hills, and the 50 is for everything else.0 -
I prefer 52/36 to anything else. I ride with a 12-25 and this allows me a nice close ratio so I don't get big jumps between gears. I've not found a hill I can't climb on 36-25 or a route where 52-12 wasn't big enough
Of course there is a difference between 39 and 36 little ring. Anyone says there isn't is talking twaddle.
If you want to up your cadence up the hills then yes, swap it out. Maybe even try the 36 with the 53 for a while, it'll work fine. You can pick up a 36 for £25. Try SJS Cycles first for that.
For me, the big problem with a compact set-up, 52/36 or 50/34, is the big drop between the chainrings, necessitating up to 3 changes in the sprockets. On a 53/42 there is an almost seamless shift when changing chainrings. 42/30 is the same ratio as 36/25 with the advantage of more efficient bigger rings, and you can ride on the inner chaining, not just climb - 42x16 is a nice gear.
True, but with a 12-30 on the back you will have huge gaps between gears and be fishing around all the time trying to find one offering you the right cadence. Each to their own, but I prefer a close ratio. I ride the 52 for 80% of the time and stick it in the 36 for the steeper stuff or prolonged riding where I know I wont be over 20mph for a while
Edit to say I'm not trying to say I'm the strongest or the fastest or whatever, I'm genuinely not. My point is a choice between close ratio cassette or bigger chain rings
No huge gaps, 11 speed: 12-13-14-15-16-17-19-21-24-27-30.
It's the 'prolonged riding where you know you won't be over 20mph for a while' when it's lovely to have a 42.
Reading this article: http://cyclingtips.com.au/2009/10/the-42t-chainring persuaded me to try a bigger inner ring. I accept that Tom Southam is a stronger cyclist than most on here, that's why I fitted a 30 sprocket.
With a road cassette, that's about as gappy as it gets!2020 Reilly Spectre - raw titanium
2020 Merida Reacto Disc Ltd - black on black
2015 CAAD8 105 - very green - stripped to turbo bike
2018 Planet X Exocet 2 - grey
The departed:
2017 Cervelo R3 DI2 - sold
Boardman CX Team - sold
Cannondale Synapse - broken
Cube Streamer - stolen
Boardman Road Comp - stolen0 -
You can't argue that a 12-30 cassette doesn't have bigger gaps between gears than a 12-25.
12-25: 12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-252020 Reilly Spectre - raw titanium
2020 Merida Reacto Disc Ltd - black on black
2015 CAAD8 105 - very green - stripped to turbo bike
2018 Planet X Exocet 2 - grey
The departed:
2017 Cervelo R3 DI2 - sold
Boardman CX Team - sold
Cannondale Synapse - broken
Cube Streamer - stolen
Boardman Road Comp - stolen0 -
You can't argue that a 12-30 cassette doesn't have bigger gaps between gears than a 12-25.
12-25: 12-13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-25
Of course, you're right, I can't!
I'm just saying that teeth difference on the larger sprockets does not mean huge gaps as it would on smaller sprockets, so a progression of 21, 24, 27, 30 feels closer than you'd imagine it would - just like the gaps on the rest of the cassette really.
This seems like a very odd way to go about things; you have a 53 for high speed stuff, but dispense with an 11 cog.
Then you choose a 42 for lower speed stuff, but have to have a big gappy cassette to get low enough gearing.
A 50/36 or a 52/36 with a 23 or 25-11, gives you;
a) just as much top end (downhill speed)
b) a similar low gear for steep hills
c) smaller and lighter, cassette, chain and chainrings
d) nice tight gear ratios, no gaps.
Downsides? Well there's a bigger difference when you front shift, but that's about it. But for most of my 'normal' riding or racing, I'm just using the big ring anyway. It's only when I hit more serious hills that I drop the front. That's what the 36 is there for to my mind; climbing.0 -
I do most of the Yorkshire hills on a 52/36 with an 11/25 cassette - Fleet Moss, Park Rash etc and wouldn't like to ride them with 53/39. Yes I could fit an 11/28 (have a wheel with one for Alps trips) but find that the gaps on the cassette are a bit big.
IMO 52/36 or 50/36 are best compromise - a 34 is too small for most thingsFFS! Harden up and grow a pair0 -
I do most of the Yorkshire hills on a 52/36 with an 11/25 cassette - Fleet Moss, Park Rash etc and wouldn't like to ride them with 53/39. Yes I could fit an 11/28 (have a wheel with one for Alps trips) but find that the gaps on the cassette are a bit big.
IMO 52/36 or 50/36 are best compromise - a 34 is too small for most things
This made me smile. A 34 inner ring is too small but a you'd quite like to fit an 11-28 cassette but the gaps are too big. Why don't you fit 34 inner ring with the 11-25? You'll achieve pretty much exactly the same as a 28 cassette but keep the gaps small! (and shave some weight off the bike too)
The more I read these threads about cassettes posted by people with "Pro" compacts (52/36) and the cassettes they use, the more I think these bigger chain sets are a badge of honour. Only when you're finding a 11-25 cassette too short is it worth swapping up to a bigger chain ring. Or am I missing something magic about Pro compacts?ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0
