Old 03-18-10, 05:10 PM
  #6  
bikingshearer 
Crawlin' up, flyin' down
 
bikingshearer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Democratic Peoples' Republic of Berkeley
Posts: 5,651

Bikes: 1967 Paramount; 1982-ish Ron Cooper; 1978 Eisentraut "A"; two mid-1960s Cinelli Speciale Corsas; and others in various stages of non-rideability.

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1025 Post(s)
Liked 2,525 Times in 1,055 Posts
Originally Posted by Typhon2222
Thanks for the replies gents!

It's good to know that road bikes can get that low.

But I guess I'm still confused. Since mountain bikes have smaller wheels, wouldn't that mean that 30/29 or 34/34 on road wheels will still be higher (in terms of distance travelled per revolution) than a 32/30 on 26" wheels? Or do the lighter wheels and frame of a road bike make up for that?
See my previous post - in terms of the gear size (or "gear development" if you want to be picky) it is all about the ratios between the cogs and the size of the wheel. That formula allows for gear comparisons between road bikes, mountain bikes, recumbents, kid's bikes, pretty much anything that doesn't use a internally geared hub (like the classic Sturmey Archer three speed), which use the internal gears to increase or decrease the base gear ratio by a set percentage. But that doesn't apply to your bike.
__________________
"I'm in shape -- round is a shape." Andy Rooney
bikingshearer is offline