Closer ratios vs easier spinning?

johngti

Just wondering, since 11-32 cassettes are now very common, does anyone feel that they miss the closer ratios available on an 11-28 compared to the "ease" of spinning up the steeper climbs? Assume 11-speed for both.

fat daddy

I have 11-28 on my road bikes and a an 11-32 on the hybrid

occasionally I wish for the 11-32 on the road bike, but pretty much every time I ride the hybrid I wish the ratios were closer and want the 11-28 on it

so yes, closer ratios are just nicer, especially for tiny gradient changes or turning in to the wind and being able to change gear for a single tooth and keep the same effort going .... its smoother, and the riding just flows better

drlodge

A bit. Just changed from 12-29 to 11-32 which opens up the gaps slightly:

Was: 12,13,14,15,16,17,19,21,23,26,29

compared to (I think)

Now: 11,12,13,14,15,17,19,22,25,28,32

So where as before I had jumps of 2 and 3 teeth at the largest sprockets, I now have jumps of 2 and 3 in smaller sprockets. I'd say the most noticeable difference is in the 19-22-25 jump as with a 50 chainring that's where I ride a lot.

Having said that, I'm always changing gear as the terrain undulates, so you soon get used to it, and on Sunday I was very thankful for the 32T with 80 miles in my legs and some short sharp climbs to get up.

bobmcstuff

I'm using an 11-32 on my main bike. It is fine for everything except chaingangs where I would really prefer something a bit closer. It's a bit annoying jumping from 80 to 110 rpm in that situation, but I suppose it is good training. For general club rides and solo riding it's not a problem at all, you just get used to it.

I'm only on 10sp though, 11sp would give you slightly smaller jumps.

Ideally I would have a race bike with a 52-36 and a 12-25 on it...

fat daddy

ah .. I didn't see the 11speed bit ..... yes I am also on 10sp, and the jumps are bigger, so probably more annoying.

you can also change gear smoother at higher torque with the 11-28 .... with the 11-32, changing with that many teeth difference can "bang" through the gears if you don't ease off a lot during the change

johngti

Interesting to see others' thoughts. I have 11-32 on both of my bikes and find that I rarely use the 32 but absolutely need it when I do. On the other hand, the group I ride with are all on closer ratios and I find it very difficult to actually adjust my speed to keep up with them on flats/false flats. They snick it down a gear and disappear. I knock it down by one and suddenly feel like all the power I was managing to develop disappears (middle of the cassette). Just wondering if it's worth trying an 11-28 and risking failure on a couple of really steep climbs or just forget about it.

timothyw

When I went up to 11 speed on my 'good' bike I went to a standard chainset 53/39 with an 11-32 cassette - gives lots of close ratios for top end but bail out gear of 39-32 is actually very similar to 34-28 you might be used to with a compact.

I've now got another good bike built up with some old ten speed kit - on that i'm running 53/39 with a ten speed 11-28 - same as the 11 speed without the 32 tooth essentially.

When I'm riding the latter, I often find that I climb as fast (if not faster) as one of my riding buddies who is on a compact - despite him generally being the better climber than me. He has the choice and temptation of an easier gear - I'm forced to keep turning the larger one.

So unless you are out for long days, or particularly hilly rides, I'd say go closer ratios - although in my experience 11-32 11 speed and 11-28 10 speed are close enough, where others might still think them a bit gappy!

meanredspider

I do have a belief, based upon my own experience, that if you fit a lower gear, you lose some ability to climb in a higher gear (the "use it or lose it" principle). There's few hills that need a 32 gear on a compact chainset - they're the ones where your front wheel keeps lifting.

Running a standard double and a 32 seems an odd choice (unless you're a pro, I guess) but each to his own.

simon_masterson

I mostly run a mixture of 8 speed 12-19 (Campag), 8 speed 12-21 (Shimano), and a good old 7 speed 12 up block, so yes, I do like close ratios - but I will put on smaller gears for proper hills. The gaps aren't that big with 10-11 speed anyway - try a 14-28 5 speed freewheel!

johngti

Think I'll give it a go. I have two sets of nice wheels I can use so having one set up with 11-28 and one with 11-32. Either way it'll be an interesting experiment!

johngti

Simon Masterson wrote:

I mostly run a mixture of 8 speed 12-19 (Campag), 8 speed 12-21 (Shimano), and a good old 7 speed 12 up block, so yes, I do like close ratios - but I will put on smaller gears for proper hills. The gaps aren't that big with 10-11 speed anyway - try a 14-28 5 speed freewheel!

The good old days!! I have no idea how on earth I coped with my first road bike in the 80s - 5 speed loveliness, can't remember what the actual ratios were. And that was in North Wales too!

drlodge

Oh I still have 7 speed on my winter bike: 13,14,16,18,21,24,28 with 34/50 up front. I really don't have any issues with these gaps, might be different if I were racing but I'm not.

simon_masterson

johngti wrote:

Simon Masterson wrote:

I mostly run a mixture of 8 speed 12-19 (Campag), 8 speed 12-21 (Shimano), and a good old 7 speed 12 up block, so yes, I do like close ratios - but I will put on smaller gears for proper hills. The gaps aren't that big with 10-11 speed anyway - try a 14-28 5 speed freewheel!

The good old days!! I have no idea how on earth I coped with my first road bike in the 80s - 5 speed loveliness, can't remember what the actual ratios were. And that was in North Wales too!

People were made of sterner stuff back then.

(I'm not - I was down in Somerset recently and thought I'd try and tackle Porlock Hill while I was there. I put on the lowest gears I had, but 42x26 was not low enough!)

johngti

I actually have a picture of my first proper bike:



Being a good Boy Scout meant being prepared to cut myself out of traps and being able to whittle a variety of useful items apparently!!

Bobbinogs

Simon Masterson wrote:

... I was down in Somerset recently and thought I'd try and tackle Porlock Hill while I was there. I put on the lowest gears I had, but 42x26 was not low enough!

Should have gone up the toll road instead. It is probably the nicest climb in the UK: quiet traffic, well surfaced throughout, awe-inspiring view that pops out every now and then, steady gradient that rarely troubles and it just goes on and on. Compare that with the brute of the hill it avoids: Brutal (unsurprisingly), busy with heavy traffic who feel the need to try and pass and then splutter, switchbacks that cause major traction issues in the damp, etc. Good challenge though...but best save those legs for going up Lynmouth hill towards the VOTR...ah, but worth it!

rolf_f

If terrain is undulaty enough to need that range then all narrow gaps mean is having to skip past them when changing gear anyway. Quicker and smoother to not have them there in the first place!

drlodge

I remember the days when I was riding 42/52 chainrings with 13-14-15-16-17-18 cassette. All hills required a good dose of Rule 5!

N0bodyOfTheGoat

Close ratios are great for fine tuning against the gradient and/or wind, I've got such a 10-speed cassette on my old Felt, not certain but think it's an Ultegra 16-27 from 2009. Back then (long before Strava), missing ~11-15 sprockets was no big deal on the descents, I'd simply redline and coast.

964cup

I think it's mostly in the mind. I manage with my 7-speed 14-28, and with a fixed wheel. On the latter, I don't find it a problem ranging from 60-130rpm in normal riding; I do occasionally wish for a lower gear when it gets steep and the cadence can be measured using a sundial.

I do normally use a close(-ish) ratio cassette (12-25 10-speed) for fast paceline work, and notice if I'm using a different bike with wider ratios that it's harder to fine-tune my position behind the wheel in front, but it's a marginal thing.

johngti

It's when I'm trying to take a wheel that I get done. The bigger jump means I have to accelerate more and I'm basically not fit enough to get back on when I start to get dropped. It's not all that expensive to get an 11-28 fitted and with a second nice pair of wheels ready to go with 11-32 I can't lose really.

Of course, there's a probability approaching 1 that all of the above is complete bull and I'll still get dropped faster than Mike Brown in a room of Lions selectors

johngti

Just in case it turns out to be helpful, I went ahead and swapped cassettes (along with going back to 172.5mm cranks). Certainly found it easier to keep a consistent cadence and didn't suffer too much up the couple of 12%+ hills we hit on Sunday so its a goer.

Probably would have been better if I'd avoided a hike on Saturday mind. Not sure the stiff knee I gained through that helped all that much on Sunday!

MozBiker

On my first bike I had a 52-36 up front and 11-32 on the back.

Now I ride a 53-39 up front and 11-26 on the back.

I definitely prefer my latter set of gears. It suits my riding style more. I can climb at 80-90 rpm up any gradient up to around 9%. More than 10% I usually climb out of the saddle.

The small gaps between the lower end gears are very nice. Especially for the mostly flat terrain I have. And a plus is that I can fine tune my gears for sprinting in a wide variety of conditions.

My gears are 11-12-13-14-15-17-19-21-23-26

I love it. Although there was once an occasion where I wish I had a 28 or a 32. But just need to train more I guess

bobmcstuff

MozBiker wrote:

On my first bike I had a 52-36 up front and 11-32 on the back.

Now I ride a 53-39 up front and 11-26 on the back.

I definitely prefer my latter set of gears. It suits my riding style more. I can climb at 80-90 rpm up any gradient up to around 9%. More than 10% I usually climb out of the saddle.

The small gaps between the lower end gears are very nice. Especially for the mostly flat terrain I have. And a plus is that I can fine tune my gears for sprinting in a wide variety of conditions.

My gears are 11-12-13-14-15-17-19-21-23-26

I love it. Although there was once an occasion where I wish I had a 28 or a 32. But just need to train more I guess

I assume based on your thread in amateur race that you are pretty quick, but 36:26 at 80rpm is 15.1kmh, which on a 9% grade would be 4.5 w/kg or more (http://bikecalculator.com/).

I suggest that most of us mere mortals cannot sustain 4.5 w/kg for too long!

dannbodge

My old bike had 50/34 and 11/32 and it was great. Could go up any hill and the gaps between gears didn't really bother me
My current bike is 50/34 and 11-28 and I've not noticed the gaps between gears being smaller but I have noticed some hills are a pain on 34-28 and a couple of time I wish I had the 32t still.

I used to do quite a lot of climbing on 50-32 so I certainly miss that gear most.

964cup

Dannbodge wrote:

I used to do quite a lot of climbing on 50-32 so I certainly miss that gear most.

Pretty much the same as 34/21. You have a 21 on your 11-28, and you won't be cross-chained that way.

dannbodge

964Cup wrote:

Dannbodge wrote:

I used to do quite a lot of climbing on 50-32 so I certainly miss that gear most.

Pretty much the same as 34/21. You have a 21 on your 11-28, and you won't be cross-chained that way.

Yeah I'm aware that there is the same (ish) ration on the 11-28 but that involves using the little ring
The other answer is get stronger and use 50-28 instead

Rodrego Hernandez

I'd be pretty confident to say that an 11 sprocket is wasted - why not get a 12-25?

drlodge

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

I'd be pretty confident to say that an 11 sprocket is wasted - why not get a 12-25?

Indeed. It annoys me that the new Campy Potenza cassette is 11-32 not 12-32. Much better to ditch the 11 and have smaller gaps where it matters.

It is (I think) 11-12-13-14-15-17-19-22-25-28-32

Better would be something like 12-13-14-15-17-19-21-23-26-29-32

svetty

The 11 is perhaps useful if you have a 50 up front, otherwise I'd much rather have a 16 than an 11

timothyw

Oh god not the 11 is pointless argument again

mrfpb

Get a triple and have the best of both worlds (50/39/30 + 11-28)

(Runs for cover)