How grim will climbing with this bike?

webboo

bobmcstuff said:

FrankYates said:

Old man speaking...but in the last century chainrings were commonly 52/42 and 7 or new fangled 8 speed blocks were 12-25 for hilly terrain. No STI just down tube shifters. No Di2.

Nobody complained. We just got on with it. Buttertubs, Nick of Pendle, Honister. Rode them all on those gears.

Yeah but back in t'day everyone was happy to grind round at 50rpm. These days the trend is to spin a higher cadence, which is certainly easier on the knees. And people thought at the top end that using the biggest gear possible made you stronger so that was the fashion for everyone else.

On a 50:11, speed at 90rpm is ~52km/h. On a 52:11 it is ~54km/h. If you're comfortable going up to 100rpm for bursts that goes up to nearly 58 km/h on the 50:11. But realistically, at those kind of speeds on a descent you'll be better off tucking anyway.

At the other end, a 34:32 means you can continue at 90rpm down to 12km/h.

On a 36:25 90 rpm is 16.4km/h - at 12km/h you'll need to be doing about 65rpm.

For perspective, 250 watts from a 70kg rider + 9kg bike on a 10% gradient is 10.3km/h according to http://bikecalculator.com/ . We have quite a lot of 10%+ gradients about.

To keep up your 90rpm on the 36:25 you'll need to be putting out close to 400 watts - a tough ask I suspect for most amateurs unless the hill is very short.

How many people are peddling at 90 revs a minute when it gets above 10% The pros are only doing it for short bursts.

pblakeney

Doesn't stop the enthusiasts from attempting to maintain the mantra.
Must keep 90, must keep 90.... Actually heard that on a huge climb. 🤣

kingstongraham

Most people drop their cadence because they run out of gears, surely? I know that's always my issue. I generally ride at about 80rpm, but my 34x28 wasn't enough on the Fedaia and dropped down (to about 50)!

pblakeney

Yeah but, doesn't stop the indoctrinated from trying. 😉

kingstongraham

pblakeney said:

Yeah but, doesn't stop the indoctrinated from trying. 😉

What I'm saying is that if your natural efficient cadence is 90rpm, you should get lower gears for going up hills, not just accept that you will have to grind up them. I wish I'd had lower gears, and if I go again, will definitely have 34x32.

bobmcstuff

webboo said:

bobmcstuff said:

FrankYates said:

Old man speaking...but in the last century chainrings were commonly 52/42 and 7 or new fangled 8 speed blocks were 12-25 for hilly terrain. No STI just down tube shifters. No Di2.

Nobody complained. We just got on with it. Buttertubs, Nick of Pendle, Honister. Rode them all on those gears.

Yeah but back in t'day everyone was happy to grind round at 50rpm. These days the trend is to spin a higher cadence, which is certainly easier on the knees. And people thought at the top end that using the biggest gear possible made you stronger so that was the fashion for everyone else.

On a 50:11, speed at 90rpm is ~52km/h. On a 52:11 it is ~54km/h. If you're comfortable going up to 100rpm for bursts that goes up to nearly 58 km/h on the 50:11. But realistically, at those kind of speeds on a descent you'll be better off tucking anyway.

At the other end, a 34:32 means you can continue at 90rpm down to 12km/h.

On a 36:25 90 rpm is 16.4km/h - at 12km/h you'll need to be doing about 65rpm.

For perspective, 250 watts from a 70kg rider + 9kg bike on a 10% gradient is 10.3km/h according to http://bikecalculator.com/ . We have quite a lot of 10%+ gradients about.

To keep up your 90rpm on the 36:25 you'll need to be putting out close to 400 watts - a tough ask I suspect for most amateurs unless the hill is very short.

How many people are peddling at 90 revs a minute when it gets above 10% The pros are only doing it for short bursts.

Yeah, I wasn't suggesting you'd be able to keep up 90rpm in all cases, it was just an example - per my above example a 70kg rider pushing 250 watts on a 10% climb would only be going 10km/h, so they would have to drop to ~75 rpm even with the 34:32 (or around 55rpm on the 36:25).

pblakeney

kingstongraham said:

pblakeney said:

Yeah but, doesn't stop the indoctrinated from trying. 😉

What I'm saying is that if your natural efficient cadence is 90rpm, you should get lower gears for going up hills, not just accept that you will have to grind up them. I wish I'd had lower gears, and if I go again, will definitely have 34x32.

I think that you are misunderstanding me.
I have passed cyclists bursting a gut trying to maintain 90RPM when clearly they weren't able to. The concept of pedalling slower didn't enter their consciousness.
This was recreational cycling not a race. They could have dropped 10RPM and actually enjoyed the route.
When you are in bottom gear and struggling "rules" count for diddly squat.

davidof

My general go to gears in the French Alps are 34x23 or 34x25 but I will drop down to x28 or even x32 if I have it and need to. So your gear setup isn't necessarily grim. Then again most alpine passes are around 8-10%.

I've done the Madeleine and Alpe d'Huez on 39x25 before I knew better :-).

ibr17xvii

davidof said:

My general go to gears in the French Alps are 34x23 or 34x25 but I will drop down to x28 or even x32 if I have it and need to. So your gear setup isn't necessarily grim. Then again most alpine passes are around 8-10%.

I've done the Madeleine and Alpe d'Huez on 39x25 before I knew better :-).

With the greatest of respect to the OP I would suggest you're far fitter than him so if he's a returner to the saddle depending on where he lives 39/25 for a bottom gear is grim

darrell1967

My bike came with 52-36 on the front and 12-28 on the back. Soon after I bought I swapped the rear cassette out for an 11-32, I was lucky because the bike came with a medium cage as standard.

I can now get up Muswell Hill and Swains Lane.

diamonddog

I agree a 39/25 is a hard combo except for the strongest riders IMO. I use a 52/39 with 12/25 on the turbo and steeper gradient workouts are a bit grim.
My road bikes have 50/34 on the front with 11/26 and 11/28 cassettes.

junglist_matty

52/39 is mid-compact (if you didn't already know).

Paired with an 11/28 cassette means you should be fine to climb after a few weeks of training, The lowest gear you have (36-28) gives a gear ratio of 1.29 - which means 1 full rotation of the crank will cause the wheel will spin 1.29 times. In other words that should be enough for you to get up most British hills, especially if - as you say - you live in a "relatively flat area".

To put that into contrast, a compact chainset (50/34) - more popular 10years ago - paired with the same cassette would give a lowest gear of 34-28 which gives a gear ratio of 1.21.

The difference is tiny so I'd recommend if you want the bike to go for it and just swap the cassette for an 11-28. When/if you buy the bike, the retailer should be able to swap the cassette for you - which would be cheaper than buying the tools to do it yourself.

mrfpb

I'm pretty sure that Team Sky went with 34/32 for a couple of mountain stages, and some younger riders in other teams followed suit. Mashing makes you wobble side to side, which wastes the extra effort.

junglist_matty

mrfpb said:

I'm pretty sure that Team Sky went with 34/32 for a couple of mountain stages, and some younger riders in other teams followed suit. Mashing makes you wobble side to side, which wastes the extra effort.

Indeed but I think there's quite a difference between the roads local to the OP (relatively flat with a few nearby hills) and those in the alps - which he'd most definitely fail to conquer armed with a 36/25

mrfpb

junglist_matty said:

mrfpb said:

I'm pretty sure that Team Sky went with 34/32 for a couple of mountain stages, and some younger riders in other teams followed suit. Mashing makes you wobble side to side, which wastes the extra effort.

Indeed but I think there's quite a difference between the roads local to the OP (relatively flat with a few nearby hills) and those in the alps - which he'd most definitely fail to conquer armed with a 36/25

I know, but when Chris Froome chooses the same granny gear as my bike, it's a bit of an ego boost.

kingstongraham

mrfpb said:

I'm pretty sure that Team Sky went with 34/32 for a couple of mountain stages, and some younger riders in other teams followed suit. Mashing makes you wobble side to side, which wastes the extra effort.

Contador was on 34x32 for some stages when he finished first in the Giro in 2011, and when he won the Vuelta in 2012.

mrfpb

kingstongraham said:

mrfpb said:

I'm pretty sure that Team Sky went with 34/32 for a couple of mountain stages, and some younger riders in other teams followed suit. Mashing makes you wobble side to side, which wastes the extra effort.

Contador was on 34x32 for some stages when he finished first in the Giro in 2011, and when he won the Vuelta in 2012.

I wasn't watching back then, but it's good to know it's not a new thing.

kingstongraham

mrfpb said:

kingstongraham said:

mrfpb said:

I'm pretty sure that Team Sky went with 34/32 for a couple of mountain stages, and some younger riders in other teams followed suit. Mashing makes you wobble side to side, which wastes the extra effort.

Contador was on 34x32 for some stages when he finished first in the Giro in 2011, and when he won the Vuelta in 2012.

I wasn't watching back then, but it's good to know it's not a new thing.

He changed onto a different bike for the last 50km of the stage up the Zoncolan in 2011 to get a lighter bike with the 34x32 gearing. I think he was probably the first to use something that low.

joe_totale-2

I think Froome used 34/32 when riding up the Angliru in the Vuelta.
His Dura Ace had to be tweaked especially for it to take a cassette that big.
That climb is something else though, there's nothing in either the Alps or Pyrenees that's like it.

davep1

OP, my previous bike came with a lovely Campag transmission, 53/39 up front and 12-25 at the back. I like climbing, and don't worry about cadence, but I noticed all my mates would stay in the saddle and spin up the climbs, and ride away from me every time we got to a long and or steep climb. When the cassette wore out I changed to a 12-27, and noticed the difference. When that one wore out, I went to a 12-29, and again noticed the difference.
The other thing is, when I replaced that bike with a new one, I wanted an aero bike too. I tested a Felt and a Giant, the Felt looked better and seemed quicker, but it was noticeably harsher; every change in road surface rattled through the frame and into me. You might be able to stand it more than me, but there are other options out there.

rich164h

As others have said, jut change the cassette. You might struggle with the existing set up but as your fitness improves you might end up putting the current cassette back on. I think the latest short cage ultegra allows up to a 30 tooth large cassette. What version do you have?

A compact chain set would be a good change as well but that’s not going to be cheap if you wasn’t to keep ultegra. You might find a cheap 105 or tiagra chain set though if you want to invest a bit more.

imposter2.0

People talking about Froome and Contador in the beginners's forum. Whatever next..

fenix

davidof said:

I've done the Madeleine and Alpe d'Huez on 39x25 before I knew better :-).

First trip to the Alps and I had a 39*26 for the Alpe. Fairly flew up it but I was young and lighter then.

Now a compact would be preferable and a lower sprocket than a 26. And I'd still be slower. 😀

pblakeney

imposter2.0 said:

People talking about Froome and Contador in the beginners's forum. Whatever next..

Used as examples to a beginner to show that there is no need to use a "macho" gear.
Fair enough IMO.

kingstongraham

imposter2.0 said:

People talking about Froome and Contador in the beginners's forum. Whatever next..

Wasn't suggesting they were beginners, happy to clarify that.

florerider

Get the bjggest cogged cassette that will fit, probably 11 30 if short cage and ride to get fit, then get into the hills a try hard. If its 4 arm cranks then 50 34 replacement, a mid cage rear mech and 11 32 cassette would cost less and have more value to you than a power meter.

DeVlaeminck

36*25 is my bottom gear and I live in Derbyshire so do plenty of hills.

I'm not claiming that's the gear everyone should use but it doesn't make riding grim and wouldn't be a big issue in a flatter area even for a relative beginner - yes there will be the odd times it makes it harder but isn't that why we ride hills - my first proper bike on taking cycling up as a sport had 42*21 !!

I will add if I was going to the Alps I'd fit something bigger - minimum 28, might go for 30 or 32 if they fit. Gearing is a personal choice though - I went for the 25 partly as on the fast Saturday ride I found my fastest times up some of steep hills where I'm hanging on to not get dropped came when I used a smaller easy gear.