Touring - Proper Gearing for Touring--HELP PLEASE!

I'm new to touring and this winter will be purchasing my first genuine touring bike (woo hoo!). I've heard that a general rule of thumb is the low gearing for a touring bike should be something around 20". I've also heard that the majority of stock touring bikes on the market today are geared too high (Trek's 520 comes to mind as an example).

I'm looking at the Bianchi Volpe as the bike that best meets my budgetary needs. Based on my calculations, however, the 2003 model's low gear is 25.3" (27" wheel size X 30-tooth chainring, divided by 32-tooth rear gear).

I've toured with my loaded mountain bike, climbing some big hills and wishing I had even lower range (the MTB has an 18" low gear!).

My questions are:

1. Is a 25" low gear too high?

2. Is it feasible to change out the 30-tooth chain ring with a 24- or 22-tooth chain ring or is it necessary to change out the whole crankset?

3. Will taking such a jump between the stock chain ring and my replacement cause any problems with front derailer compatability?

4. Is it easier to change out the rear gears instead?

Any help you can offer this Newbie would be much appreciated!

Swapping chainrings is a fairly simple thing and you can get the rings from a bike shop or mail order company such as Nashbar or Performance. Just make sure you get rings with the right bolt-circle diameter for your crankset.

My questions are:

1. Is a 25" low gear too high?

2. Is it feasible to change out the 30-tooth chain ring with a 24- or 22-tooth chain ring or is it necessary to change out the whole crankset?

3. Will taking such a jump between the stock chain ring and my replacement cause any problems with front derailer compatability?

4. Is it easier to change out the rear gears instead?

Any help you can offer this Newbie would be much appreciated!

1. Depends on your payload and your thighs, really.
2. Sounds like the bike you are considering has a road triple (as opposed to an MTB triple). Road triples use a 130/74mm bolt circle combination (MTB cranks use either 110/74 or 94/58...4 arms are somewhere in between). The good news is that 74mm chainrings can be found in the 24 tooth size. The bad news is that you will have a large gap between your middle ring and lower ring ranges. No need to swap the cranks.
3. That is good question. With a smaller inner ring you will have close to a 30 tooth difference between your largest and smallest chainrings. Can either road triple or MTB front derailleurs handle that kind of spread? I have no personal experience on this matter so i will refrain from judging.
4. I widening the range of your rear cluster would be an easier endeavor, I think. If you found a 34 tooth cassette, you could achieve the 20" goal, avoid compatibility issues with your front derailleur, and avoid creating large gear range gaps. I would research new clusters with the help of an online gearchart spreadsheet (Google search) in order to pick the the cluster that produces the ewest redundant gear combinations.

I hope that helps. My advice would be two either find a new cluster or to invest in a MTB triple crankset. The MTB crankset is the more expensive option, especially if you consider that you will need a new bottom bracket/spindle. The benefit is that you can keep the drivetrain weight down (smaller chainrings and cogs) and gain flexibility with low range gearing. I hope this helps.

Peace BK

Hi,
I have been dealing with this problem, if not successfully. I had wanted to combine a XT or XTR crankset with STI shifters. Most tell me this is not a good idea. Here are some options....
1)Get a XT rear der and a 34 tooth rear cassette (I bought an XTR rear der). Combine that with an
Ultegra crank, and swap the 30 tooth small ring for a 28. I don't do gear inches....This gives you a difference of 6 teeth, which is respectable,with Ultegra STI shifters.
2) use bar end shifters, and any crank you want.
XT,XTR,...SA makes a nice crank.
3)Use a XT rear der,34 tooth rear, an Ultegra STI shifter for the rear.....and a bar end shifter for the crank.
-Hope that is of some help-

I'm running 24x34 with a 26" wheel... 18" low. It shifts fine, but there is a big drop from 3 to 1 using the 8-speed Mega range cog set. I do worry about snapping a chain (the bike has two) or blowing up the rear hub. I would be interested to know the toqure load applied to the drivetrain parts.

I have found thats it much harder to push the bike up steep hills then to ride it up. When loaded the bags are about 80 pounds, the bike 55 or so pounds, then add riders for a total of 500 or so pounds....

Originally posted by Braumeister
I'm new to touring and this winter will be purchasing my first genuine touring bike (woo hoo!). I've heard that a general rule of thumb is the low gearing for a touring bike should be something around 20". ....

I'm looking at the Bianchi Volpe as the bike that best meets my budgetary needs. Based on my calculations, however, the 2003 model's low gear is 25.3" (27" wheel size X 30-tooth chainring, divided by 32-tooth rear gear).

I've toured with my loaded mountain bike, climbing some big hills and wishing I had even lower range (the MTB has an 18" low gear!).

My questions are:

1. Is a 25" low gear too high?

2. Is it feasible to change out the 30-tooth chain ring with a 24- or 22-tooth chain ring or is it necessary to change out the whole crankset?

3. Will taking such a jump between the stock chain ring and my replacement cause any problems with front derailer compatability?

4. Is it easier to change out the rear gears instead?

Any help you can offer this Newbie would be much appreciated!

The touring bike is more comfortable on the long run than a mountain bike, and its tires are more "efficient". However, this translates mostly into a higher speed on the flats (because of lesser tire and wind resistance), but not when climbing hills. In the latter case, the most detrimental factor is the weight of the bike. So if you were wishing for lower than 18" on the mountain bike while you were climbing hills on roads, you will be wishiing for an 18" or lower gear on your touring bike.

I haven't looked at the groupset on the Bianchi Volpe. I assume it's one of the Shimano groups, with 30-40-52 chainrings, and 11-32 cassette, plus MTB rear derailleur (LX or maybe XT).


Front chainrings:

You may change ring(s) for a 24 or 26 granny. Shifting may be smoother with a 38 or 39 middle ring. Or you way swap all rings with 24-36-48. If your bike has STI shifters, I think the large ring should be as close as possible to 52 and the middle one should be 12 teeth smaller..

Another option, with barend or downtube shifters, is to go for a MTB crankset. When I bought my bike, I discussed both options with the bike shop and they were more open to the latter proposal (which I preferred anyway), so I ended up with an XT crankset and 22-34-44 chainrings. BTW, it still left me with a top gear of 108 gear-inches... which I had used once or twice at the most.


Derailleur compatibility. It seems to be a problem mostly with the large chainring, not with the granny. And shifting up from a smallish granny isn't a problem -- in extreme cases, just shift all the way, then back. Downshifting may be a problem as you may drop the chain too far inside. If you don't succeed in adjusting the front derailleur properly, look for a gizmo called N-stop (or is it N-gear?), which catches the chain and prevents it from falling inward of the rings.

Regards,

Hi, I just saw the New 03 Novara Randonee touring bike http://www.rei.com The quality and price is good $749. you can take a look and considered about it

From the info I get in cycling Plus magazine, the frame for Bianchi is a bit heavy wgt 2450g (frame) 750g (fork), where else the Trek only weight 1867g (frame), 995g (fork)
it use true temper steel.

another option is the Fuji 03 bike http://fujibikes.com/
the frame is also true temper steel, but component are a bit heavy. It will be wise to trade in unsatisfy components during
your purchase of bike to get a better deal!

I swapped the small ring of my Campy Mirage triple (orig 30/40/50) to a 26. It just about worked, but the chain would come off at times. This summer I swapped out the chainset for a Shimano LX. The campy ergoshifters work with any chainset, and the front mech just needed lowering a bit. It works reliably and helped me get over some very steep hills and mountain trails.

Hi, I ride a bridgestone RB-t touring bike, I tend to carry way more than I need so I always ride quite a heavy bike. I re-fit the bridgestone with a dura-ace tripple, (30 - 39 - 53) using a dura-ace tripple front derailure and an XTR 12 - 34 rear cassette, I use the XTR rear derailure. I use dura - ace tripple STI shifters for the front and rear. The system works very wel, the shifts are crisp and quiet and I have a wide gear range that tends to always have the right gear available for me. I put 8600 miles on the drive trane this year and it still works as well as it did the beginning of the year. The 30 - 34 tooth combination is quite low and I've only needed to use it once while climbing the steepest peak in Mass. carrying loaded panniers and a trunk bag full of parts and gear. as for breaks, I use the avid shorty 8 canti's, they are powerfull and stop a loaded bike well. Good luck with your project. Don't worry about mixing component groups, just try to keep the front or rear the same type system, like, road front and mountain rear or the reverse. The ultegra or 105 front would work well but the gearing for the tripple is 30 - 42 - 52, I like the 39 tooth middle ring and the 53 allows you to get a little performance from the bike when not loaded.

I have just purchased a Trek 520 which I have yet to receive. I've read a lot of threads here regarding gearing and this one seems as good as any to reply to. Many people seem to be stuggling with the same issues. My wife is getting a Bianchi Volpe. Both the Trek and the Bianchi come with Shimano 105 groupsets, 52-42-30 x 11-32. I considered changing my crankset to a MTB set (44-32-22 or similar) as many suggest, but my solution is this. My shop is ordering Siguno's 48-38-26 chain rings which are compatible with the 105 crank and replacing them for free, even swap, no parts money no labor costs. My wife will do the same thing with her Bianchi. Our reasoning is that we'll do a lot more commuting than loaded touring, and this setup gives us slightly higher gearing than on our 15-yr old road bikes (~115 gear-inches) but still gets us down to about 22 gear-inches for hill climbing. I considered getting a 24-tooth chain ring but the shop felt that the shift from mid to small rings would be a bit much. Hopefully this will work favorably for us and it will be a practical and cheap solution for others. Some here have spent $200 just to get a MTB crankset.

I just got a Trek 520, and the shop will switch out the 105 crankset for an LX (44-32-22) for free. MTB cranks are more comfortable for me, with better ankle clearance and wider q-factor, plus it lowers the top gear from 128 to 108.

Braumeister

You may know this, but Excel or other spreadsheet program easily computes gear inches for the front and rears.

Place the front teeth across 3 rows (say 52-40-30) and the rear teeth down the row to the left of the 52. Each cell is 27*front/rear and gives the gear inches for all the gears. Use absolute addressing for the front teeth and just copy the first row of calcs down.

You can easily see the shift patterns. You can easily see the effects of changes.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

sheldon Brown's web site lists a couple of "custom" touring clusters. I believe they are 13-34 and 14-34. Perhaps one of these will get you the ratios you need.

Originally posted by bentbaggerlen

I have found thats it much harder to push the bike up steep hills then to ride it up. When loaded the bags are about 80 pounds, the bike 55 or so pounds, then add riders for a total of 500 or so pounds....

Definitely. When you push a bike up a hill the bike is off to the side, so the 'kink' in your back and arms makes it very difficult to apply a foreward push; you quickly tire or get a muscle ache. In addition, walking is less efficient than cycling, anyway: each foot, when it lands, must reabsorb all the precious energy you just expended pushing forward.

Forget your pride...get those granny gears!

The only problem I have with gear discussions is the use of "inches of gear." I understand the math, but to me it makes less sense than just talking about gear ratios.

roughstuff

I find the "gear inches" easier to visulize as the numbers are further apart and alows an easy comparision between the fronts to see how, when and how many rear shifts are needed when shifting the front chainrings. However, gear ratios are also good.

Also, I calculate the percentage differnece between each gear on the rear as another mans of seeing the changes. This is somewaht similiar to gear ratios.
For instance, a rear cassette with a constant change of 2 teeth between the gears given progressivley smaller percentage differneces betweent the gears as you from small cog to large cog. The gear ratios should get smaller also.

As I said, Excel is simple to use to do all the calcs and present the results in an easy table.


John Hawrylak