Touring - Gearing

I'm picking out the gearing for my touring bike what is a good range? I am using a Race Face mountain crank with 5 arm 94 spacing, and I have the following rings I could use, 46,44,34 and a granny. Will 3 of those work or should I buy some other teeth numbers,and what would be good for the cassette? I am heavy and old so hills are a challenge. Thanks Ted

Use the lowest (smallest) chainrings you can get, usually that's 44/32/22. A full set of chainrings (3) can cost more than a whole new crank. Also, a new crank complete with gears will shift better because the ramps and pins are placed optimally in relation to each other.
An 11-32 cassette is the norm. There is also 12-34 cassettes but bike makers seem reluctant to spec them. It's probably because there has been shifting problems with the 34 tooth gear. At any rate there's not a material difference between a 34 and 32 in gear inches.
I like to have the 11 because, although it is not used much while touring, it is useful when riding the bike unloaded.

I'd go for low gearing, if you feel your fitness isn't quite there.

The lowest I've heard of in terms of gear inches is 18", which you can get with something like a Schlumpf or the SRAM DualDrives. I assume you can do this with a triple as well, not sure on that.

A typical touring bike is around 27", by the way.

My wife and I use 42/32/22 with 11-32 you can just about go anywhere with the lowest setting.
We are not young nor super fit and it has worked out very well for us.

While there is a Gear thread happening anyone want to give an opinion on this proposed set up for a loaded world tour? I've got a 12-27 right now but I am thinking about switching it up just a little.

48/38/24 - 13 14 15 17 19 21 24 27 30
100.9 79.9 50.4
93.7 74.2 46.8
87.4 69.2 43.7
77.1 61.1 38.6
69.0 54.6 34.5
62.4 49.4 31.2
54.6 43.3 27.3
48.6 38.5 24.3
43.7 34.6 21.9

I'm picking out the gearing for my touring bike what is a good range? I am using a Race Face mountain crank with 5 arm 94 spacing, and I have the following rings I could use, 46,44,34 and a granny. Will 3 of those work or should I buy some other teeth numbers,and what would be good for the cassette? I am heavy and old so hills are a challenge. Thanks Ted

A 46/34/22 is a very nice crankset combination. I have in on my touring bike (with a RaceFace Turbine) with a 11-34 cassette on the wheel. It works well and makes a nice transition from middle range to high range in the middle of the cassette. Go to Sheldon Brown's Gear (http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/) calculator and play with numbers before you decide, however.

Here's my gearing

42/26 on the front with an 11-34 cassette. Its set up so that I use the 42t ring with from 11 to 23 and the 26t ring
from 17 up to 34. I can infact use all the cogs with both chain rings but keep the chain angle reasonable. I
went with the 26t ring as I was worried about the front shifting, but it works smoothly with an ultegra double.
Going from the 42 to the 26 is a big ratio change, but its not difficult to get used to here's my gear inches

cog/ring 42 26
11 103 64
13 87 54
15 76 47
17 67 41
20 57 35
23 49 31
26 44 27
30 38 23
34 33 21

Use the lowest (smallest) chainrings you can get, usually that's 44/32/22. A full set of chainrings (3) can cost more than a whole new crank. Also, a new crank complete with gears will shift better because the ramps and pins are placed optimally in relation to each other.
An 11-32 cassette is the norm. There is also 12-34 cassettes but bike makers seem reluctant to spec them. It's probably because there has been shifting problems with the 34 tooth gear. At any rate there's not a material difference between a 34 and 32 in gear inches.
I like to have the 11 because, although it is not used much while touring, it is useful when riding the bike unloaded.
I tend to like a 48-34-24 combination with a 12-32 but I wouldn't argue with George's assessment since it certainly wouldn't hurt anything.

The bottom line is this - you almost NEVER use the fastest gears on a touring bike and you seldom use near the fastest. There was one place on our last tour where one of the group wanted to hurt everyone else and picked the pace up to 20 mph for the last 20 miles but I wasn't in high gear with my 53-39-24 combination with a 13-28 7 speed on the back.

But when you need lower gears you really need lower gears.

From mountain biking I've discovered that the LOWER limit is being able to ride about 2.5 to 3 mph. Any slower than that and you can't balance a bicycle safely. You end up swerving all over the road and you don't want to be doing that on a highway with a steep climb.

So you need to have sufficient strength to turn a large enough gear to carry you and your load up the steepest road at 3 mph or faster. I usually feel comfortable riding at 4 mph up steep stuff in a 24-28 but there are times when a 30 would have been nice. My load was about 40 lbs and I weigh in at about 200 clothed.

So while you really need low gears there is a lower limit and I think that a 22-34 is below that limit.

As for high gears I could point out that the gear I normally use was only 2/3rds of nun's high gear so his setup seems to fall well within my standards as well.

There are a lot of ways to achieve the same thing. But everyone that has toured seems to advise lower gears instead of higher.

Use the lowest (smallest) chainrings you can get, usually that's 44/32/22. A full set of chainrings (3) can cost more than a whole new crank. Also, a new crank complete with gears will shift better because the ramps and pins are placed optimally in relation to each other.
An 11-32 cassette is the norm. There is also 12-34 cassettes but bike makers seem reluctant to spec them. It's probably because there has been shifting problems with the 34 tooth gear. At any rate there's not a material difference between a 34 and 32 in gear inches.
I like to have the 11 because, although it is not used much while touring, it is useful when riding the bike unloaded.
That's an excellent summary, even right down to the 11T usage.

Maybe this deserves it's own thread, but it is related to the OP's question, and there are people with very low gears answering...

Is there a practical lower limit for gears? I would think that there was, but have no experience down in the teens.

I tend to like a 48-34-24 combination with a 12-32 but I wouldn't argue with George's assessment since it certainly wouldn't hurt anything.

The bottom line is this - you almost NEVER use the fastest gears on a touring bike and you seldom use near the fastest. There was one place on our last tour where one of the group wanted to hurt everyone else and picked the pace up to 20 mph for the last 20 miles but I wasn't in high gear with my 53-39-24 combination with a 13-28 7 speed on the back.

But when you need lower gears you really need lower gears.

Since hoss10 already has the 46 tooth outer ring, it makes more sense to just use it and an 11-34 cassette. I've found that 11-34 are more readily available in 9 speeds than 12-34 also. A 46/11 combination is a 114" gear while a 48/12 is a 109" gear. Not really enough of a difference to worry about. As for the chainrings working together, any chainring will work with any other. Some are just nicer then others.

I'm a big fan, hoss10, of experimentation. If you try it and it doesn't work, it cost you nothing but some time.


From mountain biking I've discovered that the LOWER limit is being able to ride about 2.5 to 3 mph. Any slower than that and you can't balance a bicycle safely. You end up swerving all over the road and you don't want to be doing that on a highway with a steep climb.

So you need to have sufficient strength to turn a large enough gear to carry you and your load up the steepest road at 3 mph or faster. I usually feel comfortable riding at 4 mph up steep stuff in a 24-28 but there are times when a 30 would have been nice. My load was about 40 lbs and I weigh in at about 200 clothed.

So while you really need low gears there is a lower limit and I think that a 22-34 is below that limit.

I'd disagree with a 22/34 as being too slow to keep the bike balanced. Perhaps I different from others but I have no problem keeping a straight line at even less than 2 mph (I can track stand pretty well even with a load...or on a tandem;) ) There's lots of places where a 22/34 comes in very handy. The Alpowa summit is one I can think of. Also the climb out of the Golden Eagle ferry dock in Illinios is another. Of course you aren't going to use it all the time but it's handy to have when you need it.


As for high gears I could point out that the gear I normally use was only 2/3rds of nun's high gear so his setup seems to fall well within my standards as well.

There are a lot of ways to achieve the same thing. But everyone that has toured seems to advise lower gears instead of higher.

I prefer a nice range of gears. I tend to throw myself down things as fast as I can so a nice gear over 100" is necessary to my riding style. I also use the bike at other times and, being the lazy cuss I am, I hate to change the chainwheels any more than I have to. Having a 114" high gear and a 17" low gives me a great range with a minimum of hassle.

Maybe this deserves it's own thread, but it is related to the OP's question, and there are people with very low gears answering...

Is there a practical lower limit for gears? I would think that there was, but have no experience down in the teens.

Not really. I've mountain biked with a Quad (http://www.abundantadventures.com/mt_plus.html) with a 44/34/24/16 and a 12-34 cassette. A 12" gear won't get you going fast anywhere but I never had problems staying upright.

I can infact use all the cogs with both chain rings but keep the chain angle reasonable.

Hey! I thought about this setup a while ago. http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=255784

By the way, what is your motivation for keeping the chain angle reasonable?

Apparently, from an efficiency standpoint, there is very little loss from chain angles.

See issue 50 and 51. http://www.ihpva.org/HParchive/issues.htm

Since hoss10 already has the 46 tooth outer ring, it makes more sense to just use it and an 11-34 cassette.

Would it depend on the type of shifter?

That is, large jumps in chainring size is easier with a friction shifter than an STI/index shifter. Given the small ring is a 26, inferring from the chainring sizes on compact cranks, I would think that a jump greater than 16 teeth would be difficult with an STI shifter.

Not really. I've mountain biked with a Quad (http://www.abundantadventures.com/mt_plus.html) with a 44/34/24/16 and a 12-34 cassette. A 12" gear won't get you going fast anywhere but I never had problems staying upright.
Thanks for the link. This is a nice combination. I have a 46/34/24 front, and a 16 or 18 woud be a very nice addition. It would certainly improve my image going up steep hills.

Not really. I've mountain biked with a Quad (http://www.abundantadventures.com/mt_plus.html) with a 44/34/24/16 and a 12-34 cassette. A 12" gear won't get you going fast anywhere but I never had problems staying upright.

Are there problems with the front derailer?

Does anyone know, is it even possible to put a cassette larger than 27-28T on a bike with integrated road shifters and derailleurs? From everything I've read, larger cassettes (32 or 34T) only seem to work with derailleurs designed for touring or mountain bikes.

Having never really used a cassette that size, is there a big difference between 27 and 32T?

And I was interested to note what was described earlier in the thread as a big difference between 11 and 12T.

When I complete an upcoming build, I'll have a bike rigged up with brifters, a road triple 52-39-30 and a Shimano 12-27 cassette. This may work for light or flat touring but from what I hear more and more on this forum, I'm going to need to rig it up with a larger cassette, smaller granny gear, and indexed/friction shifters if I'm going to tackle any serious expedition touring. Does that sound right?

Would it depend on the type of shifter?

That is, large jumps in chainring size is easier with a friction shifter than an STI/index shifter. Given the small ring is a 26, inferring from the chainring sizes on compact cranks, I would think that a jump greater than 16 teeth would be difficult with an STI shifter.

I have the same combination on the same (or similar) crank (46/34/22). I use an STI shifter with a Tiagra front derailer without issues. Shifts are nice and crisp.

I

A typical touring bike is around 27", by the way.

I'd have to disagree. Stock gearing is in that range but those guys are really afraid of pushing it lower. It's pretty easy to get way below a 27" gear that still shifts and performs very well.

Does anyone know, is it even possible to put a cassette larger than 27-28T on a bike with integrated road shifters and derailleurs? From everything I've read, larger cassettes (32 or 34T) only seem to work with derailleurs designed for touring or mountain bikes.

Having never really used a cassette that size, is there a big difference between 27 and 32T?

And I was interested to note what was described earlier in the thread as a big difference between 11 and 12T.

When I complete an upcoming build, I'll have a bike rigged up with brifters, a road triple 52-39-30 and a Shimano 12-27 cassette. This may work for light or flat touring but from what I hear more and more on this forum, I'm going to need to rig it up with a larger cassette, smaller granny gear, and indexed/friction shifters if I'm going to tackle any serious expedition touring. Does that sound right?

Yes, it's very easy. I'd suspect that even a long cage road derailer would handle a 32 easily. Most of my bikes have XTs on them but even the bike I had with a short cage road derailer handled a 29 tooth cog well.

If you are going to the combination you detailed why not go to a mountain bike or trekking crank? A 48/11 combination is almost identical to the 52/12 in terms of gearing. The smaller chainwheels shift a bit better, in my opinion, and with the smaller inner ring (usually a 36 or 34) you get a better middle range. When you combine it with a 24 inner, you get a low that's worth carrying around ;)

Nashbar is selling an XT Octalink (http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?category=81&subcategory=1031&brand=&sku=19580&storetype=&estoreid=&pagename=Shop%20by%20Subcat%3A%20ATB%20Cranks) trekking crank right now for $90 which is a super deal. I just ordered one to get rid of the 53/42/30 crank on my commuter bike. Even a speed demon like me doesn't need a 130" gear:eek: ;)

Edit: Michel Gagnon has a website (http://mgagnon.net/velo/pedalier4.en.shtml)about this conversion. He post here in the touring forums a lot.

Are there problems with the front derailer?

There weren't 15 or so years ago but derailers back then had a much wider range. I doubt if you could get an indexing front shifter to work. It would probably work with a cheaper front derailer and a barcon shifter. The cheaper front derailers have a bit more capacity then the more expensive ones.

If you are going to the combination you detailed why not go to a mountain bike or trekking crank? A 48/11 combination is almost identical to the 52/12 in terms of gearing. The smaller chainwheels shift a bit better, in my opinion, and with the smaller inner ring (usually a 36 or 34) you get a better middle range. When you combine it with a 24 inner, you get a low that's worth carrying around ;) ...


I have some fairly specific desires for a crank set. 1) I need a 177.5mm crank arm length and 2) I'd prefer a splined bottom bracket that stands up well in wet Seattle weather.

I ended up with a Dura Ace triple because it was one of the few cranks that met both criteria. I'm going to keep that up front no matter what although I might consider changing out chainrings. Not ideal for touring, I know, but well suited otherwise, for commuting and long weekend/century rides which will occupy about 90-95% of my time on the bike.

Anyways, I was hoping to compensate for the big rings of the DA with a larger toothed rear cassette, thinking if I got up to 32 or 34T that it would perform passably well for most of the touring I'll be doing. Not ideal but certainly workable I would imagine. According to my LBS, the Campy long cage rear derailleur won't really work with anything much larger than a 29-30T. I guess time will tell, and a few mountain passes :)

I have some fairly specific desires for a crank set. 1) I need a 177.5mm crank arm length and 2) I'd prefer a splined bottom bracket that stands up well in wet Seattle weather.

I ended up with a Dura Ace triple because it was one of the few cranks that met both criteria. I'm going to keep that up front no matter what although I might consider changing out chainrings. Not ideal for touring, I know, but well suited otherwise, for commuting and long weekend/century rides which will occupy about 90-95% of my time on the bike.

Anyways, I was hoping to compensate for the big rings of the DA with a larger toothed rear cassette, thinking if I got up to 32 or 34T that it would perform passably well for most of the touring I'll be doing. Not ideal, I know, but certainly workable I would imagine. I guess time will tell, and a few mountain passes :)

If the Dura Ace is 130mm bolt circle, you could still go with a 48/38/26 (or maybe 24) for the front if you want to change the chainrings. Your curent setup isn't bad...I've touring many miles with something similar... but if you have problems or need a lower range of gears, changing to the above ring set would help. My order of change would be the cassette first (easier and cheaper to change) then the rings.

Greenstork,

I fear you are getting 10 speed. If so, you lose compatability with the mountain bike stuff which is 9 speed.
I don't know how well the Dura Ace rear derailleur handles a larger than 27 tooth gear but it is a moot point because Shimano does not provide a 10 speed cassette with a gear larger than 27.
What kind of bike are you building that you would put Dura Ace on but is capable of touring?
I think of Dura Ace in terms of pure road bike. On a more versatile bike, not a pure road bike, I do not consider road groups but rather mountain bike groups. I'll be building a Long Haul Trucker soon. It's main use will be for my almost daily road ride. I have a high tech road bike but aesthetically, I hate it. I've retired from the racer poser crowd and do not have to keep up with them anymore. Now, I can ride what I really want to ride. I'm going with a 48/36/26 crank. This will give me a good top end AND a good low end. I'll be able to hang with the roadies if I want to and I'll be able to tour on it too. I can use 9 speed road casettes such as 11-23 or 12-26 or I can use mountain bike cassettes like the 11-34. I can change them to suit my specific needs at any time.
My point is, are you sure you want Dura Ace for this bike?

As a gearing geek I love this thread! My Surly LHT will have a 20/36/46 up front, and an 11/34 in the back. This results in a lower low gear than my 26" MTB, and a higher high gear than my Trek1100 road bike.

I've been puzzling for a while over how to effectively present gear-inch chart (front/rear*27) and how to present the optimal path through the effectively usable gear, and I've ended up with this sort of a chart:
http://www.thirdwave-websites.com/bike/gear-pattern.jpg

I'd sure appreciate any critique or suggestions about a way to present this info. I think it's a key issue in bicycle popularity- the market sells people bikes with 27 gears and no info or briefing on how to use them.

By way of explanation, the chart indicates the gear-inches resulting from every gear combo.
The effective path through the gears is indicated by the green color and the smaller sequence numbers.
The large-large combos are not available, there's not enough chain to accomodate them.

So, you'd start in the granny gear F20 / R 34, and click the rear derailluer twice to get to 3rd gear.
Then, you'd upshift to the middle chainring and downshift the rear twice, to get to 4th gear.
You'd stay in the middle chainring for 5 gear shifts, resulting in 9th gear at 61 gear-inches.

To get to the 10th gear, upshift the chainring and downshift the rear derailleur for a 10th gear of F46/R18.
Continue shifting the rear der. until you get to 14th gear - which, if you get there, probably means you're descending and light.

Greenstork,

I fear you are getting 10 speed. If so, you lose compatability with the mountain bike stuff which is 9 speed.
I don't know how well the Dura Ace rear derailleur handles a larger than 27 tooth gear but it is a moot point because Shimano does not provide a 10 speed cassette with a gear larger than 27.
What kind of bike are you building that you would put Dura Ace on but is capable of touring?
I think of Dura Ace in terms of pure road bike. On a more versatile bike, not a pure road bike, I do not consider road groups but rather mountain bike groups. I'll be building a Long Haul Trucker soon. It's main use will be for my almost daily road ride. I have a high tech road bike but aesthetically, I hate it. I've retired from the racer poser crowd and do not have to keep up with them anymore. Now, I can ride what I really want to ride. I'm going with a 48/36/26 crank. This will give me a good top end AND a good low end. I'll be able to hang with the roadies if I want to and I'll be able to tour on it too. I can use 9 speed road casettes such as 11-23 or 12-26 or I can use mountain bike cassettes like the 11-34. I can change them to suit my specific needs at any time.
My point is, are you sure you want Dura Ace for this bike?

Hi Geo,

I'm building up a super commuting, randonneur, long distance, light touring bike. It's a custom lugged Waterford based on their road sport touring geometry which features slightly longer chainstays, beefier tubes and disc brakes. It's a bike that I designed specifically to commute in Seattle's wet winters. It just so happens that it will be sturdy enough to tour with and light & agile enough to strip down and take out on a long weekend ride. I'm not deluded into thinking I can have one bike to do everything, which is why I've kept my road bike. I do however prefer to use brifters for my city riding. The setup is Campy Centaur shifters and derailleurs and Shimano crankset and cassette (and a JTek ShiftMate), Phil Wood disc hubs laced up to DT Swiss TK 7.1 rims. The bike will be used as a commuter over 75% of the time and make no mistake, it will be bombproof.

While not ideal for touring the way it will be setup, I'm thinking that I can make due with a few minor modifications. If I can get by just changing the cassette, then I'm more than pleased. More realistically however, I'll be much happier changing out the cassette, rear derailleur, and shifters to be perfectly setup for a tour. I'm trying to determine if I really need to change out the chainrings as well.

So the reason that I haven't opted for mtn. bike drivetrain from the beginning is because touring isn't the sole purpose of this bike. In fact, it may just makeup only 10% of its usage, if that helps you understand why I'm putting a DA crankset on.

EDIT: I would have opted for Shimano 105's if it was available in a 177.5 crank arm length, by the way.

WOOOO my head hurts! Lets simplify this, how about this choice:

A set of Race Face rings (only slighty used), 44, 32, 22, and a 11-32 cassette.

Or switch out the 44 for 46 Veluta, (wrong colour, new) I have both, same cassette.

How much difference will I notice?

Thanks Ted "I should have paid way more attention in Mrs. Cricks' Math class"

I own all of the above rings.

Greenstork Being way off topic and highjacking my own thread ,why did you choose the DT Swiss TK 7.1 rims? I'm presently trying to build up a bombproof touring bike and was leaning the same way or going with Velocity Dyads. I envy you the Phil hubs.

WOOOO my head hurts! Lets simplify this, how about this choice:

A set of Race Face rings (only slighty used), 44, 32, 22, and a 11-32 cassette.

Or switch out the 44 for 46 Veluta, (wrong colour, new) I have both, same cassette.

How much difference will I notice?

Thanks Ted "I should have paid way more attention in Mrs. Cricks' Math class"

I own all of the above rings.
I use 22-32-44 and 11-32. The combination does all my riding from randonnees to tours to commuting.

But much of my riding includes hills and quite a lot of gear. I do have the urge occasionally to go the next step up with a 24 ring and 46 big ring, depending on my fitness. Right now... I'll stick with the 22-32-44 because my fitness has dropped w-a-a-a-a-y off. Having a few spare rings lying around with different teeth numbers is not a bad thing.

Greenstork Being way off topic and highjacking my own thread ,why did you choose the DT Swiss TK 7.1 rims? I'm presently trying to build up a bombproof touring bike and was leaning the same way or going with Velocity Dyads. I envy you the Phil hubs.

I seem to be hijacking threads all over the place, sorry about that. I swear there was a "thread relevant" question there to begin with... I think :D

I decided on the DT rims based on the recommendation of my LBS. I'm not a light guy at 6'4" 225lbs. and I'll be running disc brakes which puts added stress on a rim. I wanted something I didn't have to worry about, ever, that would accommodate a 28 or 32mm wheel and I was steered towards the DT rims, 36 spoke in the rear, 32 up front. I considered many other rims that worked better for city riding/commuting/road rides and was ill suited for touring like the Mavic CXP33 and I was steered soundly away from the Deep V's by a few people.

I found 10 SPEED 11-32 & 11-34 cassettes.
Interloc Racing Design, InterlocRacing.com

Interloc also makes the Compact Road Triple-lizer.
It is a 110mm Bolt Circle Diameter chainring that allows you to bolt a 74mm BCD chainring to it.
It turns a Compact Road Crankset into a Compact Triple Crankset.
Unfortunately it is only available in a 36 tooth size.

Harris Cyclery, http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/, carries.......
110mm BCD chainrings in sizes 33-60 Outer and Middle
74mm BCD chainrings in sizes 24-36 Inner
2 Sugino and 1 Shimano 110/74 BCD Cranksets

Unfortunately these cranksets are cheap and ugly.
But, with the Interloc Triple-lizer you could convert a Compact Road Double into a Compact Road Triple.
FSA makes an extensive range of Compact Road Doubles including some with carbon fiber crankarms.
It doesn't seem like manufactuers have caught on that there would be a demand for a Compact Road Triple. Maybe they have but I just don't know about it.

With the chainrings from Harris and a 110/74 crank you could build any kind of crank that you desire.
With a Interloc Triple-lizer you could have a very sweet triple crank with outer rings from 33-60 and inner rings from 24-36 but you would be limited to a 36 tooth middle ring at least for the present.
Unfortunately, the rings would be lacking ramps and pins.

Me, I'll use a Deore 48/36/26 on my 700c touring bike when I'm not touring and a Deore 44/32/22 when I am touring. If I need to go really fast I'll ride my road bike.

Yes, it's very easy. I'd suspect that even a long cage road derailer would handle a 32 easily. Most of my bikes have XTs on them but even the bike I had with a short cage road derailer handled a 29 tooth cog well.

If you are going to the combination you detailed why not go to a mountain bike or trekking crank? A 48/11 combination is almost identical to the 52/12 in terms of gearing. The smaller chainwheels shift a bit better, in my opinion, and with the smaller inner ring (usually a 36 or 34) you get a better middle range. When you combine it with a 24 inner, you get a low that's worth carrying around ;)

Nashbar is selling an XT Octalink (http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?category=81&subcategory=1031&brand=&sku=19580&storetype=&estoreid=&pagename=Shop%20by%20Subcat%3A%20ATB%20Cranks) trekking crank right now for $90 which is a super deal. I just ordered one to get rid of the 53/42/30 crank on my commuter bike. Even a speed demon like me doesn't need a 130" gear:eek: ;)

Edit: Michel Gagnon has a website (http://mgagnon.net/velo/pedalier4.en.shtml)about this conversion. He post here in the touring forums a lot.

The mechanics of putting a bigger cassette with a road derailer are straight forward. I followed the directions on Sheldon Brown's website. Note that Sheldon states that some frames cannot handle cogs bigger than 30.

I have the same combination on the same (or similar) crank (46/34/22). I use an STI shifter with a Tiagra front derailer without issues. Shifts are nice and crisp.

I thought that the OP has a double instead of a triple. So instead of 12-t jumps he has one 16-t jump from 26 to 42. If I am correct, do you still think that he could have a 44 or 46 big chainring with the 26?

The mechanics of putting a bigger cassette with a road derailer are straight forward. I followed the directions on Sheldon Brown's website. Note that Sheldon states that some frames cannot handle cogs bigger than 30.

Sheldon Brown's website also lists maximum cog sizes for rear derailleurs as well as total capacity: http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/derailers-rear.html

You'll notice that road derailleurs are designed for a maximum cog of 27 and they have less capacity than mountain derailleurs. On any road bike except the latest 10 speed versions, a mountain bike rear derailleur is the best way to get a wide range of gears and will work fine with STI shifters.

"I like to have the 11 because, although it is not used much while touring, it is useful when riding the bike unloaded."

""That's an excellent summary, even right down to the 11T usage.""

I agree with you, but then your touring bikes isn't really a touring bike, it's a hybrid. Nothing wrong with that. Like I like to comute with a an MTB with slicks on it. I haven't bought an MTB in quite a while, but when i used to buy them the manufacturers were delivering them with 1.75" tires with a hybrid tread. In my book that might make them a better all around bike, but it doesn't make them "for real".

I agree with Cycco, a 27" gear is not "reality stock" on a touring bike. It's one of the things that makes bikestore touring bikes a little disappointing. The problem with selling bikes is that you do have to sell them. Very few people who test ride a bike show up with all the gear and then bang around a touring course. I know I like the bike when I take it for a ride and it seems to ride way better than expected, which is rarely going to the be the convincing result of a flatland test of a bike with gears in the 20-90" range. Without the load on the bike the 20 inch gear is going to feel useless, and the top end a let-down.

On the flip side, if you were to talk to an experienced group of tourists it is unlikely that they would have much in the way of uncontradictory advice. If they know how to ride and how to choose bike stuff their gears will be personalized in some way that may not suit the next person.

Greenstork,

You're building a pretty incredible bike. I am Campy-dumb and I didn't know it was Shimano compatible.
What does the JTek Shiftmate do?
As I said, I found 11-32 and 11-34 ten speed cassettes.
A Dura Ace rear derailleur might not work with an Interloc 11-32 but a XTR rear derailleur would probably work with a Dura Ace 12-27 and would certainly work with a Interloc 11-32.
Why do you think you would have to change the shifters to tour? I don't think that you would have to.
They should work fine with any crank or cassette as long as it's 10 speed.
I guess I'm skepticle of road cranks for anything but road racing.
Well, if the road cranks don't work for touring you'll have to change the cranks for the tour.
If you have to settle for 175 cranks just move your cleats forward 2.5mm.
Are you using the Avid disk brakes that are compatible with road bike brake levers?

I thought that the OP has a double instead of a triple. So instead of 12-t jumps he has one 16-t jump from 26 to 42. If I am correct, do you still think that he could have a 44 or 46 big chainring with the 26?

I'm pretty sure hoss10 was talking about a triple.

Not that I would ever do a 44 to 26 (it's a hellva jump;) ) but I think it could work. The old Half step gearing with granny had a jump about like that. I don't know if an indexed front shifter, like an STI, would work but a barcon should do it.

Greenstork,

You're building a pretty incredible bike. I am Campy-dumb and I didn't know it was Shimano compatible.
What does the JTek Shiftmate do?
As I said, I found 11-32 and 11-34 ten speed cassettes.
A Dura Ace rear derailleur might not work with an Interloc 11-32 but a XTR rear derailleur would probably work with a Dura Ace 12-27 and would certainly work with a Interloc 11-32.
Why do you think you would have to change the shifters to tour? I don't think that you would have to.
They should work fine with any crank or cassette as long as it's 10 speed.
I guess I'm skepticle of road cranks for anything but road racing.
Well, if the road cranks don't work for touring you'll have to change the cranks for the tour.
If you have to settle for 175 cranks just move your cleats forward 2.5mm.
Are you using the Avid disk brakes that are compatible with road bike brake levers?

Hi Geo, I'm pretty excited about my new ride. The ShiftMate allows you to mix Campy and Shimano pretty freely and smoothly. It essentially equalizes the cable pull (cassette spacing) between the two drivetrains. The one cardinal rule when mixing drivetrains however is that shifters and derailleurs should match, so I'll use a Centaur long cage derailleur. I found out more from that Sheldon Brown link -- it appears that the largest cog I can take with that derailleur is a 29T.

I may have to swap out part of the drivetrain for touring, or make due with the road triple and 12-27 cassette.

The disc brakes I'm using are the new (unreleased) Shimano BR-R505 road disc brakes. My buddy at the LBS is a disc brake aficionado you might say, and he managed to score some of the first few off the production line (not sure how). He claims they outshine the Avid's, I guess I'll find out for myself soon enough.

edtrek, that is a good way to show off the various gears. I think you are going to want to use a few more of them than you show there. The 81 inch gear is right in the middle of a very large 14% gap and even the lower gears on the 46 ring might prove useful.

That 11-34 combo you have could be a 12 speed 12-28 without loosing anything of importance to the average tourer. Getting right down to 7 speeds, chains you could run a Harley on.

I was wondering about the kind of gear a tour the france bike has on it. I thought I saw an article somewhere showing what the average bike had on it, and the top gear was lower or no higher than someo f the higher gears one sees on touring bikes. I know they have all kinds of specialty combinations for climbing or time trials, but does anyone know what an average road racing bike high end is? I would like to go into these kinds of discusions at least knowing what the average racer has on his high end so I could at least know I don't need to be anywhere near that.

Peterpan1,
The highest combination I've ever heard of for road racing is a 55-11 but I'm sure there are freakish track bikes or something that exceed that. On average, I bet you'd find a 53-11 with an 11-23 cassette (although I'm sure the cassette is changed out each day depending on the stage of the TDF).

Sheldon Brown's website also lists maximum cog sizes for rear derailleurs as well as total capacity: http://sheldonbrown.com/harris/derailers-rear.html

You'll notice that road derailleurs are designed for a maximum cog of 27 and they have less capacity than mountain derailleurs. On any road bike except the latest 10 speed versions, a mountain bike rear derailleur is the best way to get a wide range of gears and will work fine with STI shifters.

Sheldon does say the following

Manufacturers have to assume that their customers are clueless, and will expect the chain to have some tension on it even in the bad gears where the chain is using small chainrings with small rear sprockets. Thus, the rated chain-wrap capacity is very conservative. A competent cyclist who uses the gears properly can generally exceed this by several teeth with no problem.

Most derailers also specify a maximum size rear sprocket. This is often a pessimistic value, based on the largest sprocket that is normally provided as part of that group.

If you look at the list carefully you'll see that every derailer in the road groups handles only 27 tooth cogs. Only the chain wrap capacity is different. I find the limitation at 27 teeth to be very conservative for long cage derailers...and a little suspicious.

I'm certain that, if you are careful and don't try to make the big/big combination (which is usually silly anyway), any of the long cage road derailers will handle a 32 or even a 34.

If you look at the list carefully you'll see that every derailer in the road groups handles only 27 tooth cogs. Only the chain wrap capacity is different. I find the limitation at 27 teeth to be very conservative for long cage derailers...and a little suspicious.

I'm certain that, if you are careful and don't try to make the big/big combination (which is usually silly anyway), any of the long cage road derailers will handle a 32 or even a 34.

So exactly what type of catastrophe would ensue if one accidentally tried to use the big/big combination?

On any road bike except the latest 10 speed versions, a mountain bike rear derailleur is the best way to get a wide range of gears and will work fine with STI shifters.

I'd agree that a mountain bike derailer is probably a better choice especially for touring because of its robustness. There shouldn't be an issue with the 10 speed systems, however. The derailer is just a robot and doesn't really care what it's tied to. Only the shifter is important.

So exactly what type of catastrophe would ensue if one accidentally tried to use the big/big combination?

It depends on the bike. I tend to run my chain short so that I can get a few more gears on the low end without the chain rubbing on itself. I've folded over a 53 tooth chainring on a tandem when I inadvertently shifted to the big/big combination.

However, the real reason not to use that gear is because it's duplicated elsewhere on the cassette anyway. I could see using it in a racing situation...sorta...but in touring, you'd be better off to have shifted down to the midrange anyway. It's just a more efficient use of the gear system.

If you look at the list carefully you'll see that every derailer in the road groups handles only 27 tooth cogs. Only the chain wrap capacity is different. I find the limitation at 27 teeth to be very conservative for long cage derailers...and a little suspicious.

I'm certain that, if you are careful and don't try to make the big/big combination (which is usually silly anyway), any of the long cage road derailers will handle a 32 or even a 34.
The 27 tooth figure is the Official Party Line, but it really relates to the fact that Shimano calls cassettes with 27 teeth or smaller "road" cassettes, while it calls those with a 28 or larger sprocket "mountain" cassettes.

This is bogus marketing terminology. It would make more sense to call them "narrow range" and "wide range." Indeed, back in the '70s and '80s, wide range clusters were commonly called "touring" parts.

Similarly with the derailers, "road" and "mountain" are marketing terms for narrow range and wide range units. It has nothing to do with the sort of surface you will be riding on.

Shimano's "road" rear derailers will generally handle anything up to 30 teeth unless you have an unusually wide range in front. They generally _don't_ work with 32.


So exactly what type of catastrophe would ensue if one accidentally tried to use the big/big combination?
You would have slightly increased chain and sprocket wear, increased friction, it would likely run a bit rough, and if you back-pedaled, the chain might fall off the big chainring.

Hardly a catastrophe.

Sheldon "Chainline" Brown

It depends on the bike. I tend to run my chain short so that I can get a few more gears on the low end without the chain rubbing on itself. I've folded over a 53 tooth chainring on a tandem when I inadvertently shifted to the big/big combination.

However, the real reason not to use that gear is because it's duplicated elsewhere on the cassette anyway. I could see using it in a racing situation...sorta...but in touring, you'd be better off to have shifted down to the midrange anyway. It's just a more efficient use of the gear system.

I understand in principle and I usually try to stay in the middle of all of my rings. However, sometimes (rarely... I think) I'm just not paying close attention and forget that I'm on the big ring. Commuting every day, it may happen to me once every month or two. I'd probably feel more comfortable within the suggested range. If only Shimano made a 12-29... I'm sure I could build my own Shimano compatible cassette but I have concerns about "Shimano compatible" and a ShiftMate. In theory it should work however since Shimano compatible essentially means the correct splines and spacing.

As a gearing geek I love this thread! My Surly LHT will have a 20/36/46 up front, and an 11/34 in the back. This results in a lower low gear than my 26" MTB, and a higher high gear than my Trek1100 road bike.

I've been puzzling for a while over how to effectively present gear-inch chart (front/rear*27) and how to present the optimal path through the effectively usable gear, and I've ended up with this sort of a chart:
http://www.thirdwave-websites.com/bike/gear-pattern.jpg

I'd sure appreciate any critique or suggestions about a way to present this info. I think it's a key issue in bicycle popularity- the market sells people bikes with 27 gears and no info or briefing on how to use them.

By way of explanation, the chart indicates the gear-inches resulting from every gear combo.
The effective path through the gears is indicated by the green color and the smaller sequence numbers.
The large-large combos are not available, there's not enough chain to accomodate them.

So, you'd start in the granny gear F20 / R 34, and click the rear derailluer twice to get to 3rd gear.
Then, you'd upshift to the middle chainring and downshift the rear twice, to get to 4th gear.
You'd stay in the middle chainring for 5 gear shifts, resulting in 9th gear at 61 gear-inches.

To get to the 10th gear, upshift the chainring and downshift the rear derailleur for a 10th gear of F46/R18.
Continue shifting the rear der. until you get to 14th gear - which, if you get there, probably means you're descending and light.

Your chart looks interesting. How do you generate it as an image?

By the way, try the same gear chart with a 34 tooth middle instead of the 36. The change over gear at the 18 tooth cog is more natural.

Greenstork,

I've used both Avid and Shimano cable actuated disk brakes on my mountain bike. The Avids are widely acclaimed but I think the Shimano's work well too. The Avids are somewhat fragile. I broke one when attaching the brake cable to the caliper. I guess I twisted it a little. I don't think that should have happened.
Well, post a pic when you have it all done.

WOOOO my head hurts! Lets simplify this, how about this choice:

A set of Race Face rings (only slighty used), 44, 32, 22, and a 11-32 cassette.

Or switch out the 44 for 46 Veluta, (wrong colour, new) I have both, same cassette.

How much difference will I notice?

Thanks Ted "I should have paid way more attention in Mrs. Cricks' Math class"

I own all of the above rings.

Your original post says that you have a 34 tooth chainring. The 46 to 32 jump would be a little more 'abrupt' but not so bad as to be unworkable. Go over to Sheldon Brown's Gear Calculator (http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/) and run numbers. You'll get a chart of numbers that are pretty easy to interpret (look at edtrek's post to see how they work). You can put any number combinations in you like and see what works.

The 44/32/22 with your 11-32 cassette would work well. Your high gear is going to be around 109" rather than 114" with the 46. Not that much difference, really. Unless you are stupid like me and hurl yourself down hills at speeds that would frighten Spock, you'll be fine.

They're just numbers - don't be afraid of them.

Greenstork Being way off topic and highjacking my own thread ,why did you choose the DT Swiss TK 7.1 rims? I'm presently trying to build up a bombproof touring bike and was leaning the same way or going with Velocity Dyads. I envy you the Phil hubs.

A good touring wheel would be XT hubs laced with DT Alpine III to the Velocity or to a Mavic A719. The Phils are very nice but very, very expensive. The XT are great hubs that are relatively cheap. The Alpine III are great spokes. I've used them on a mountain bike wheel for nearly 5 years without any issues. All my wheels are built with them now.