Is there anyway 52/36 & 11-32 is inferior to 50/34 & 11-28

superkenners

I am entirely happy with my 50/34 11-28 mechanically, but think sometime I could do with a bigger front ring. But equally like having an escape if I run into a big hill at the end of a ride.

So was thinking about changing to a semi-compact (52/36) with 32 tooth on the back. Looking at gear ratios this seems to be a superior combination (and presume there are fewer overlapping gears too)?

Aside from cost is there anyway this is not superior to normal compact set up?

Apologies if this has been done to death as a topic!

imposter2.0

It has been done to death several times already, as you rightfully say, because there is no single correct answer and everyone just reverts to quoting gear tables and the thread usually ends in pointless censored -waving.

Two words - 'personal' 'preference'. Quite simply, if you think you would be better on a different set of ratios, then the only personal who will be able to tell you whether it is worthwhile or not is you.

fenix

50x11 should be enough of a big gear really. If you're spinning that out - then you need to learn to spin faster - or more likely just tuck in.

I wouldn't think its worth the expense myself.

stueys

You'll have a broader range of gearing, by a smidge, at 52/36. No real issues other than the top of your cassette will have some slightly bigger jumps, depends on your preference as to whether that is an issue or not. You'll also need a long cage derailleur to run 32, if you've got 11-28 on now I suspect you've got a short cage.

I run a 52/36 on 11-28 for everything apart for the yearly trip to the proper mountains, when I switch to 50/34 11-28. Personally the new Dura looks interesting as it allows you to run a 30, 52/36 on an 11-30 would save me switching chain rings around.

fat daddy

I went through all of this a while back ... came to the conclusion that it didn't matter, so went with the lightest option . ..... that also doesn't make much difference BUT it feels good having a light bike.

Ultmately if you are regularily spinning out 50-11 and want more speed, then you have no choice ... get the bigger gears ... with an 11-32 cassette on the back you just wont have a smooth time going from cog to cog as the jumps are bigger and you might find on flatter rides you haven't gear middle gear you like you are always either side of the cadence and speed you want do be doing ........ maybe, you might it all fine

sloppyschleckonds

fat daddy wrote:

I went through all of this a while back ... came to the conclusion that it didn't matter,

At least you got there in the end

superkenners

Thanks for thoughts, interesting. Had not thought much about wider gaps, had been thinking along lines that would mean more use of front mech. Should probably wait for something to wear out first then. Or tuck and spin more which is probably the most sensible way forward But seems a very marginal upgrade for 99% of riding.

MikeBrew

32 cassette is going to have larger jumps between cogs (and therefore between gear inches). I would guess that the 52T front ring will probably make those gear inch jumps even more pronounced (bigger), than on the 50T....

964cup

If 34/28 is low enough for you in the mountains, you might as well run 53/39 and 11-32 all the time. That gives you a massive top end, a more useful small ring in normal riding, and with 39/32 the same winch gear as 34/28 (1:1.121). For me that's the thing with 11-speed (and presumably shortly 12-speed if Eagle is a precursor to a road group) - you can have these cassettes with massive ranges while retaining a sufficiently close spacing to make them usable.

I think we've already seen "gravel bikes" with a 44T single front ring and 10-36 XD cassette; that gives the same range as a 53x12 down to a 34/28. I run a 46T front and an 11-32 cassette on my 1x11 commuter; I might try an XD hub next time and see how the 44+10-36 arrangement works out.

964cup

Oh, and as for the "jumps between gears" thing - I've been spending a good deal of time riding my just-finished 1987 ALAN, which has 53/39 and 13-28 7-speed. So that's 8 fewer gears than a modern 11-speed drivetrain, and fairly big gaps between them. I can't say it suddenly made me hate cycling. Sometimes I think we forget how long we all spent with just 10 or 12 gears to choose from.

stueys

964Cup wrote:

If 34/28 is low enough for you in the mountains, you might as well run 53/39 and 11-32 all the time. That gives you a massive top end, a more useful small ring in normal riding, and with 39/32 the same winch gear as 34/28 (1:1.121).

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that, it's a good option with a wider range. But I'd have to get used to the look of the big cassette......which may be a struggle

Bobbinogs

Stueys wrote:

964Cup wrote:

If 34/28 is low enough for you in the mountains, you might as well run 53/39 and 11-32 all the time. That gives you a massive top end, a more useful small ring in normal riding, and with 39/32 the same winch gear as 34/28 (1:1.121).

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that, it's a good option with a wider range. But I'd have to get used to the look of the big cassette......which may be a struggle

Yepp, I reckon most of the semi-pro 'demand' has come about because people want smaller gears but don't want it to look like they need them...hence, having a nice big 52T on the outside matched with 50mm rims is all part of the look...and it seems that the look is then maximised by riding slowly so everyone gets to see you

chrisw12

Everyone's different and for me the gearing I need depends on the weight I'm carrying and my fitness so I agree with 964cup suggestion, 53x39 with a 32 gives me a range that deals with all my and condition changes. On top of that, what hasn't been mentioned, with the bigger spread it allows me to stay on the outer ring longer.

Agree that in the olden days 11x32 could be a bit gappy but that's the beauty of 11speed.

thomasmorris

At the back you've got a choice between greater range for varied gradients versus tighter ratios for slicker shifting and more accurate cadence selection. It's personal preference, but with ever increasing numbers of sprockets you can have more of both.

At the front it's similar. Some people won't mind a big step as they only use the inner sparingly, so clunky shifts aren't an issue. Some people prefer to get more even use at the front, so a tighter shift is preferable. If you live in a hilly area you may want to put up with bigger shifts in return for the bigger range. It's personnel preference, but with better derailleurs / shifting ramps you can have more of both.

For any gear ratio there is less resistance using bigger sprockets. But bigger sprockets are heavier. Again personal preference between imperceptible drive train efficiency versus imperceptible weight savings.

If you want to get down to really fine details, it's nice to find yourself using the gears most that also have the best chain lines.

And some people say an 11t feels a bit 'notchy'.

The world won't end either way, after all, some people ride fixed

JesseD

I ride a 50/34 compact with a 12-25 cassette and have raced successfully on it this year, that said for next year I will be moving to 52/36 on the front as I found I could spin out when descending in 50 x 12, that said if I come across a bike which is a great deal and has a compact on it I will buy it as it’s not a deal breaker for me and if that happens I will probably just buy a couple of different ratio cassettes for different parcours.

11-23 for flat races and crits
12-25 for most other stuff
12-28 for very hilly races or training rides

Then again I will do the same probably if I buy a bike with a semi-compact chainset.

The only thing I have noticed with a compact is that I spend 95% of my time in the big ring, last year I wore out one ring in 8 months (Shimano 105 5800) so had to replace it, I am still on the original small ring, maybe moving to 52/36 will mean I divide my riding time between the rings more?

svetty

JesseD wrote:

The only thing I have noticed with a compact is that I spend 95% of my time in the big ring, last year I wore out one ring in 8 months (Shimano 105 5800) so had to replace it, I am still on the original small ring, maybe moving to 52/36 will mean I divide my riding time between the rings more?

^ This exactly!

I'm a 52-36 man myself and swap out rear wheels depending on the ride I'm doing (either 11-25 or 11-28). Having said this I believe there is much to be said for 50-36 - I just find that when I ride a 50 I'm lazy and leave it in the 50 unless climbing a decent incline, using a 52 makes me use both rings more.

alan_sherman

Something to be aware of is that if the gap in the front rings is where you would normally be riding then it can be a pain because you are always double shifting or staying in a gear longer than you would like to avoid double shifting.

Back in the day i would ride all day in the 42 or 39 ring, and use the big ring for descents or when really pushing on along the flat. Then I bought a compact 34 / 50. The 50 was fine, but the 34 was too low for general flat / rolling rides with the club. I found I was forever having to double shift around 20 mph and 90rpm Which just wasn't very nice. I bought a 36, which was better. But a 38 would be better still!

With modern cassettes having larger cogs I think the old standard 38x52 might even make a comeback for road riders! With an 11-30 cassette it is a nice range.
Either that or stick with a closer ratio rear and get a triple to spend most of a ride in the 39 whilst having the 50 for racing and the granny ring as a bail out.

I recommend looking at the Sheldon Brown gear calc. Input the details with gear units as MPH @ 90 RPM to see where the double shift hits you (and the crossover in big/small rings).

rick_chasey

More expensive to change the chainrings than it is the cassette.

Main limiting factor.

superkenners

I tend to sit in big ring all the time which was one of the reasons I was thinking of making the switch, to make better use of full range. I have Di2 so having to change from big to little ring more often is not a problem, in fact I guess it would be a better upgrade on a Di2 system rather than normal cable front mech.

My initial plan was to upgrade the 10 speed on my winter bike to Ultegra 11 speed, and switch my existing compact and cassette with semi-comp and 11-32 I'd order for that switch, then just get a new rear Di2 mech and ebay the old one (and old groupset).

I reckon all in cost is probably £300-350 ish, and then have all same stuff across bikes so everything compatible from that point of view.