blah
09-11-03, 07:30 PM
witch 1 is better for dirt jumping????
BMX - big sprocet or little
Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.View Full Version : big sprocet or little
OneTinSloth
09-13-03, 01:05 AM
big. the main advantage of a smaller sprocket (aside from weight) is that it's "out of the way" for grinds and such on street. personally i despise the new small gearing trend. everything wears out so much faster when you run a small sprocket and small cog because there are fewer teeth taking the abuse of just pedalling the bike, you're also putting a lot more torque into it because the crankarms stay at 175mm or 180mm while the sprocket is smaller, which leads to even faster front sprocket and chain wear.
a friend of mine uses a profile cassette hub and he's had to replace the cassette body at least once since he got it about a year and a half ago. it's a sweet hub though.
i prefer the tried and true 44/16 gearing. the weight you'll save with smaller gearing is neglegible. it's just a trend. a stupid, stupid trend.
a friend of mine uses a profile cassette hub and he's had to replace the cassette body at least once since he got it about a year and a half ago. it's a sweet hub though.
i prefer the tried and true 44/16 gearing. the weight you'll save with smaller gearing is neglegible. it's just a trend. a stupid, stupid trend.
Hoffman kid
10-16-03, 08:33 PM
Hey dude, a smaller sprocket is better no offense to the poster above me but is accelerates faster and its a ot stronger and thicker and it weighs alot less and for a dirt jumper acceleration and weight plays a big part... and its not a trend...
OneTinSloth
10-17-03, 02:02 AM
yeah, hey dude...smaller sprocket up front means smaller cog in the rear.
smaller cog in the rear means fewer teeth engaging. fewer teeth means grearer chance of chain slippage. chain slippage is BAAAD.
it's a stupid trend.
fewer teeth to drive the bike = more wear on the sprocket and cog.
if you think it's better, go ahead and think that...most dirt jumpers i know still use 44/16. the weight you're saving is not enough to make any kind of difference anyway. sprockets are made out of aluminum for christ's sake, it's not heavy to begin with.
smaller cog in the rear means fewer teeth engaging. fewer teeth means grearer chance of chain slippage. chain slippage is BAAAD.
it's a stupid trend.
fewer teeth to drive the bike = more wear on the sprocket and cog.
if you think it's better, go ahead and think that...most dirt jumpers i know still use 44/16. the weight you're saving is not enough to make any kind of difference anyway. sprockets are made out of aluminum for christ's sake, it's not heavy to begin with.
SmArT
10-22-03, 09:41 AM
its not really a trend as smaller gearing will probably be here to stay. and as for the wearing on your sprocket, it will make it wear slightly faster but you wont really notice that much of a difference. the torque on your chain part is absolutely correct though. but at the end of the day the reason most people go smaller is to keep their sprocket out of the way as the weight saved is barely nothing at all and if you go down to a 13 tooth cog or below the weight of the cassette hub pretty much cancels out the sprocket/chain weight you have saved. but as you really dont need your sprocket out of the way for trails and if your freewhell decides to die, i can guarentee your local shop will have a 16 tooth freewheel in stock. but arent as likely to have any 14/15's or cassete cogs. at the end of the day its up to you but for trails riding only theres no point in going smaller than a 44-16.