36/46 poor choice

ugo.santalucia

I really rate 36/46 chainsets...
My chainset is now around 5 years old, I've changed the 46 ring twice and it's probably time for a new one... I am beginning to think it's time to let it go.

However, not many options:

More of the same Shimano CX 50 (10 speed)
Ultegra 6800, the doomed series which splits in half, better steer clear of it
Ultegra r 8000 which is about 200 quid and twice what I would like to spend

No R 7000, no R 5800, no R 4700...

Anything else?

timothyw

Couldn't stand 46/36 personally. Also somewhat at odds with the general trend for wider ranges in gearing - perhaps being replaced by 1x setups in cyclocross circles?

Spa have some cheap stronglight chainsets - https://www.spacycles.co.uk/m2b0s109p45 ... act-Double

Other option would be to find an old 6750/5750 or other Shimano compact 5 bolt chainset and stick some new chainrings on - Spa have some cheap zicral ones that last ages.

What makes you think you need to replace the cranks anyway? Pretty rare that they fail isn't it (6800 excepted...)?

Certainly I've never managed to kill any and I've broken plenty of bikes in plenty of ways.

secretsam

It's probably not helpful for old f@rts like me to point out that back in the day, you could pretty much have any chainring combo you wanted...my first 'good' bike ran 48/36 (and 12-28 at the back)
Don't the super-niche new gravel groupsets have something like that?

ugo.santalucia

you might be right, they might last another 10 years and I just have to keep replacing the ring.

I don't like 16 T jumps between rings, 10 is ideal, I could probably live with 12... I never liked compact chainsets... one moment you are grinding, the next you are spinning, there is no progression when you jump between rings

ugo.santalucia

SecretSam wrote:

Don't the super-niche new gravel groupsets have something like that?

GRX have 16 or 17 T jumps... not good

keef66

ugo.santalucia wrote:

you might be right, they might last another 10 years and I just have to keep replacing the ring.

I don't like 16 T jumps between rings, 10 is ideal, I could probably live with 12... I never liked compact chainsets... one moment you are grinding, the next you are spinning, there is no progression when you jump between rings

+1 to that. I have the same 46/36 chainset on my winter bike and love the fact there's no huge gap / need for compensatory changes at the back. Same on the summer bike only it's a triple chainset with similar jumps between rings.

ugo.santalucia

I suppose one could get a 50 x 34 which is commonly available and then replace the inner ring with a 39 (11 pounds for the R 7000), there days they are all 110 BCD, as I understand

shirley_basso

It simply isn't true that compacts mean you are spinning or grinding.

Just use your gears more effectively.

ugo.santalucia

Shirley Basso wrote:

It simply isn't true that compacts mean you are spinning or grinding.

Just use your gears more effectively.

For the record, I had a 50/34 for years and never liked it, so unless you have something to contribute... :roll:

timothyw

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I suppose one could get a 50 x 34 which is commonly available and then replace the inner ring with a 39 (11 pounds for the R 7000), there days they are all 110 BCD, as I understand

This is probably the best idea.

I can certainly relate to the joy of a nice close change at the front from the times I've ridden a standard, unfortunately the combo of a winch gear and a descending gear is too tempting for a big lad....

ugo.santalucia

... and obviously there is no drawback in using an 11 speed chainset with 10 speed chain and FD...

imposter2.0

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

It simply isn't true that compacts mean you are spinning or grinding.

Just use your gears more effectively.

For the record, I had a 50/34 for years and never liked it, so unless you have something to contribute... :roll:

SB is quite right though. There is nothing inherently problematic about a compact chainset which means you are either 'spinning or grinding'. If that's the case, you are simply not utilising your available gearing correctly. Conventional wisdom is to compensate by switching one or two sprockets at the back - either up the cassette or down, depending on which ring you are shifting to on the front.

ugo.santalucia

Imposter wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

It simply isn't true that compacts mean you are spinning or grinding.

Just use your gears more effectively.

For the record, I had a 50/34 for years and never liked it, so unless you have something to contribute... :roll:

SB is quite right though. There is nothing inherently problematic about a compact chainset which means you are either 'spinning or grinding'. If that's the case, you are simply not utilising your available gearing correctly.

But I never liked it... can I not like something?
There is nothing inherently wrong in pear cider either, but I just don't like it and I'd rather have apple cider

imposter2.0

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Imposter wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

It simply isn't true that compacts mean you are spinning or grinding.

Just use your gears more effectively.

For the record, I had a 50/34 for years and never liked it, so unless you have something to contribute... :roll:

SB is quite right though. There is nothing inherently problematic about a compact chainset which means you are either 'spinning or grinding'. If that's the case, you are simply not utilising your available gearing correctly.

But I never liked it... can I not like something?
There is nothing inherently wrong in pear cider either, but I just don't like it and I'd rather have apple cider

I don't care if you 'like' it or not. I'm simply stating that your assertion that you either 'spinn or grind' on a compact is simplistic and not consistent with reality, that's all.

trek_dan

My parts box 'gravel' hack is running 50-39. Purely because I happened to have a 130BCD set of cranks lying around. The 50t 130bcd outer is Sugino branded and was off Ebay from memory.

ugo.santalucia

Imposter wrote:

I don't care if you 'like' it or not. I'm simply stating that your assertion that you either 'spinn or grind' on a compact is simplistic and not consistent with reality, that's all.

surely there are other threads that need your assistance? :roll:

ugo.santalucia

trek_dan wrote:

My parts box 'gravel' hack is running 50-39. Purely because I happened to have a 130BCD set of cranks lying around. The 50t 130bcd outer is Sugino branded and was off Ebay from memory.

39 might be a concern on occasions, but being able to stick a 34 at the rear should get me out of most troubles... maybe Bushcombe lane and Hardknott might become off limits, but hey ho, who wants to go up there anyway...

I'd rather have a 39 front that having to live with a 16 T drop

imposter2.0

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Imposter wrote:

I don't care if you 'like' it or not. I'm simply stating that your assertion that you either 'spinn or grind' on a compact is simplistic and not consistent with reality, that's all.

surely there are other threads that need your assistance? :roll:

No others that you have posted random nonsense on, no. Well, none that I can see, anyway...

DeVlaeminck

You can't go wrong with a standard 53*42 especially with modern 7 speed cassettes you can always have a 23 sprocket if you need it.

trek_dan

ugo.santalucia wrote:

trek_dan wrote:

My parts box 'gravel' hack is running 50-39. Purely because I happened to have a 130BCD set of cranks lying around. The 50t 130bcd outer is Sugino branded and was off Ebay from memory.

39 might be a concern on occasions, but being able to stick a 34 at the rear should get me out of most troubles... maybe Bushcombe lane and Hardknott might become off limits, but hey ho, who wants to go up there anyway...

I'd rather have a 39 front that having to live with a 16 T drop

I went 11-32 cassette for convenience as same cassette I use on my CX bikes.

ugo.santalucia

Imposter wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Imposter wrote:

I don't care if you 'like' it or not. I'm simply stating that your assertion that you either 'spinn or grind' on a compact is simplistic and not consistent with reality, that's all.

surely there are other threads that need your assistance? :roll:

No others that you have posted random nonsense on, no. Well, none that I can see, anyway...

You could always do a few miles on Zwift then...

imposter2.0

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Imposter wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Imposter wrote:

I don't care if you 'like' it or not. I'm simply stating that your assertion that you either 'spinn or grind' on a compact is simplistic and not consistent with reality, that's all.

surely there are other threads that need your assistance? :roll:

No others that you have posted random nonsense on, no. Well, none that I can see, anyway...

You could always do a few miles on Zwift then...

No zwift here. You could always do a few more miles on a compact - doesn't sound like you've learnt how to use one yet...

ugo.santalucia

there are some good offers around on the all R 7000 groupset, which might be a cost effective option rather than replacing bit by bit as components age, but annoingly (AGAIN) poor choice... only braze on (do they still exist?), hardly any 170 mm cranks... pretty much only available in black...

As often, better choice in Germany

N0bodyOfTheGoat

How about a 30/39/50 triple such as https://www.merlincycles.com/shimano-10 ... 46227.html for £64?

-Dash

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Ultegra 6800, the doomed series which splits in half, better steer clear of it

I've done over 35000 miles on one and it hasn't split in half yet. Maybe that issue didn't effect many of them?

ugo.santalucia

-Dash wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Ultegra 6800, the doomed series which splits in half, better steer clear of it

I've done over 35000 miles on one and it hasn't split in half yet. Maybe that issue didn't effect many of them?

I am sure it's a small minority, but I don't want to risk it... I use the bike to ride quite far and often with very few options ob being "rescued"

ugo.santalucia

NitrousOxide wrote:

How about a 30/39/50 triple such as https://www.merlincycles.com/shimano-10 ... 46227.html for £64?

That means different shifters and whatnot...

janwal

Just go to 1x. 42 front 11-42 rear. Or a 40 front if you are doing Hardknotts and Wrynose! No big drop on the front to irritate you. All the ratios you need. The oft cited big jump between gears just isn’t a problem at all as they are mainly on the climbing gears which you won’t use for a lot of most rides.

lesfirth

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Imposter wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Shirley Basso wrote:

It simply isn't true that compacts mean you are spinning or grinding.

Just use your gears more effectively.

For the record, I had a 50/34 for years and never liked it, so unless you have something to contribute... :roll:

SB is quite right though. There is nothing inherently problematic about a compact chainset which means you are either 'spinning or grinding'. If that's the case, you are simply not utilising your available gearing correctly.

But I never liked it... can I not like something?
There is nothing inherently wrong in pear cider either, but I just don't like it and I'd rather have apple cider

You can love or hate whatever you want. I am happy to hear your opinion but Shirley has a different opinion with which I agree. On other subjects I often agree with you. Your :roll: tends to make me value your opinion less.

itboffin

i'm also not a fan of compact chain rings, the triple i used to have was great but got carried away by trends and swapped, i've since gone 52/36 which is much better for keeping up on the flat club ride sections, i'm not a spinner.

Triple its the future

chris_bass

ugo.santalucia wrote:

But I never liked it... can I not like something?
There is nothing inherently wrong in pear cider either, but I just don't like it and I'd rather have apple cider

that's not really a fair analogy though.

if you said you never really liked pear cider because it didn't go well with your cornflakes and someone pointed out you weren't meant to pour it on your cornflakes and suggested you tried drinking it on it's own that would be a nearer analogy.