Touring - how do you get those low gears?

Just read a pretty good book about bike touring that suggests you should have an 18" gear (or below) for scaling those mtn passes and such w/ a fully loaded bike. Just wondering, how do you get gears that low on a typical touring bike? (i.e. crank w/ a BCD 110/74) I'm starting to think a mountain bike-to-tourer is the way to go. Any advice?

Modern mountain biking drivetrain is commonly used on touring frames. A 22 granny with a 34 big cog will give you just under 18". That's low enough to winch yourself up practically anything.

How do you even keep the bike vertical with gearing that low ? At such a slow speed, I would think balancing the bike becomes very difficult.

No more difficult than when going fast!

How do you even keep the bike vertical with gearing that low ? At such a slow speed, I would think balancing the bike becomes very difficult.

Spin baby, Spin!:roflmao2: I have only been on one climb where I was going slow enough that I was better off getting off and walking....but I had already been passed by a couple of guys running...up hill:eek::o

Aaron:)

22T-34T is the granniest gear that I have on my bike, and when it is loaded with 20 or 30 lbs of luggage and water, I work hard to climb very steep hills. It's not too low. One of my friends has 20T-34T, and he uses it!

http://www.abundantadventures.com/quads.html
Because a 16 tooth granny gear is what you really need.

I run am mtb drive on my touring bike (a converted Trek 7500) and run a 22/32/42 with an 11-30 (8 speed) in the rear... this gives me a nice gear range from 19.6 to 102.2 and with a 34 I could go as low as 17.3 gear inches.

Having ridden at just under 4 mph on a 28x34 gear on a tandem at 9,200" elevation.
Slow, but very do-able!

Easy once you're rolling, but if you have to stop on a hard/steep section, it can be a bit tricky to get going again because your first stroke is already at 6 o'clock before you've found your balance. This is where a Rohloff has a slight advantage - it's very easy to switch to a slightly higher gear before you get back on the bike, so you can start cranking with more control. On a derailleur bike you'd have to lift the back end off the ground (with all that luggage!) and faff about with the pedals & derailleurs.

Thanks for the tip - this site is very interesting

You can go pretty slow. A 22/34 with a 26" wheel gets you 16.8 inches. Just mash up the hill. Kinda like mash-glide-mash-glide.

Here's one way...

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=468365

There is also the Schlumpf Mountain Drive which has a 2.5 to 1 plantary type reduction gear in the bottom bracket. A tap of the foot and your 20 gear-inch is now an 8 gear-inch. I can maintain 3 MPH up a 20% grade with a full load at 19 G-I. Steeper then that the front wheel can start to lift off the ground. Then I walk.

www.schlumpf.ch/

Go to Sheldon's site and fritz with the gear choices for you actual rig and tire size. With really small gears it's easier to get them on 26". I did find it hard not to put a foot down the first time I tried, particularly if the shoulder gets a soft spot, or you get a big tail eddy off a truck. All in all a lot easier than the same thing on a recumbent.

There is also the Schlumpf Mountain Drive which has a 2.5 to 1 plantary type reduction gear in the bottom bracket. A tap of the foot and your 20 gear-inch is now an 8 gear-inch. I can maintain 3 MPH up a 20% grade with a full load at 19 G-I. Steeper then that the front wheel can start to lift off the ground. Then I walk.

www.schlumpf.ch/

Can you use the Mountain Drive with a Tripple ring?

Just read a pretty good book about bike touring that suggests you should have an 18" gear (or below) for scaling those mtn passes and such w/ a fully loaded bike. Just wondering, how do you get gears that low on a typical touring bike? (i.e. crank w/ a BCD 110/74) I'm starting to think a mountain bike-to-tourer is the way to go. Any advice?

The lowest you'll get on a 110/74 is a 24x34 combo which is 19" on a 27" wheel. I make do with a 42/26
double and an 11/34 cassette to give me 21" to 103" which is great for touring.

I have an old TA Zephyr just waiting to be installed and with that I could do a 20x34 which would be 16"

Can you use the Mountain Drive with a Tripple ring?

yep, check out page A2: http://www.schlumpf.ch/handbuecher/WHB.md.engl.pdf

Pray tell nun, how do you have yourself a 42/26 double? I'm looking for almost exactly the same setup, and can't afford a TA.

I don't find anything quite that low necessary. A 26-32 was OK for everything on the Trans America. There were maybe three times in the Appalachians that I might have shifted one gear lower if I had it. In the Cascades and Rockies it was completely adequate.

I since put a 24T ring on but still use the 32 in the rear. Nothing wrong with a 22-34, but it isn't a necessity for most riders in anything close to normal touring conditions unless maybe you travel pretty heavy.

It's nice to know it's there though, just in case you come across something out of the ordinary.

Nothing wrong with a 22-34, but it isn't a necessity for most riders in anything close to normal touring conditions unless maybe you travel pretty heavy.

And that also has a lot to do with the riders' fitness level.

The world of cycle-tourists is divided into two main camps: Those who crave ultra low gears, and those who are perfectly satisfied with slightly higher gears!

Ultimately, each rider discovers, through their own experiences, just how low they need to go. I have switched drive trains five or six times during the past 15 years, and each time, I have opted for smaller granny gears. One's own experiences with these matters is of paramount importance.

I have been following this forum for five years, and the closest thing to a consensus about gearing that I have read is that a wide range is good for bicycle touring... although the fixies might take issue.

One's own experiences with these matters is of paramount importance.

That might be overstating it a bit - you can always use gear 2 instead.

It's nice to know it's there though, just in case you come across something out of the ordinary.
I agree, but hate to see new riders assuming they need to go to some extreme before they can tour. I find it a bit amusing to read threads where the riders assume they have to have all kinds of stuff before they can even consider touring. I mean there are the folks who haven't toured a single mile, but have a long list of must have items they need to upgrade on their LHT complete, or whatever, despite the fact that their bike is quite capable of long distance touring right out of the box.

A 46-36-26 with an 11-32 is adequate for most, even for an XC tour and even for untrained cyclists. Spending an extra $10 for a 24T is probably not a bad idea, but swapping the crank for one that takes a 22T seems excessive for most riders. If they have a road crank that only goes down to 30T then it makes sense to swap it out, but if they have one that goes down to 30T it may not be worth it.

I spend more time riding fixed than I do riding geared bikes... when were riding on Saturday the wind speeds were clocked as high as 105 kmh and had I been riding any of my fixed gears I would have been screwed.

Pray tell nun, how do you have yourself a 42/26 double? I'm looking for almost exactly the same setup, and can't afford a TA.

Perhaps I should have put double in quotation marks. All I did was to use the middle and inner rings of a 110/74 Sugino XD triple. I adjusted the chain line a bit and it works very well.

Using the triple I found that the outer ring (48 or 46) wasn't really necessary and the middle (36) was just a bit too small. So I figured a 42 ring combined with a 12x34 or 11x 34 9 speed cassette was perfect for my riding pace of between 14 and 18 mph. And a 26 inner ring would give me gears down to 21" for the mountains and the 16 teeth difference between the rings was still within an Ultegra double FD range. In fact the derailleurs that get used for compact cranks are good for a wide double too.

You need a set of crank bolts for a single ring to mount the 42 ring on the inner position and you'll have to move the crank a few mm out by adjusting the BB cartridge to get the chain line right. Also the gap between the FD and the 42 ring will have to be larger than usual to get chainstay clearance, but it works well. I can use both front rings on all 9 rear cogs, although I usually avoid this because of the poor chain line. I ride 90% of the time on the 42 ring and only go to the 26 in hilly terrain.

I figured as such, but i was hoping you had a different solution. I've thought about a setup like that, but my only hesitancy is my vanity...I know it' s not good, but I just think that those funny tabs on the outside look, well, not good. The only remedy I can think of to that is a cyclocross chain guard, but they only look a little better.

then again, maybe if I care this much about appearance, I should just spend the money on a TA and shut up...

>Ultimately, each rider discovers, through their own experiences, just how low they need to go. I have switched drive trains five or six times during the past 15 years, and each time, I have opted for smaller granny gears. One's own experiences with these matters is of paramount importance.

My experience is that every LBS considers 30:34 (that is, 34 on the back...) to be ridiculously low already, and "any lower than that and you might as well walk".

On my most recent tour there was a guy with an IGH, who nearly died on what felt like a pretty modest (if long) hill to me. His lowest gear seemed to correspond to about the low end of my middle ring. Still, he made it, and makes me ashamed of my own desire for lower gearing...

Steve

every LBS considers 30:34 to be ridiculously low already, and "any lower than that and you might as well walk"

I find that, on really steep/rough stuff (and at altitude), it's FAR easier to ride at walking speed than to walk.

Another interesting thing for me is that many people feel they need a ridiculous granny gear so that they can maintain their 'flat' cadence on steep hills. Personally, I find trying to maintain a fast cadence on steep ground kills me within 5 minutes - I find it much more efficient to choose a slightly higher gear and a more plodding cadence.

I figured as such, but i was hoping you had a different solution. I've thought about a setup like that, but my only hesitancy is my vanity...I know it' s not good, but I just think that those funny tabs on the outside look, well, not good. The only remedy I can think of to that is a cyclocross chain guard, but they only look a little better.

then again, maybe if I care this much about appearance, I should just spend the money on a TA and shut up...

I think chain guards look awful and my reaction to the exposed crank tabs was initially similar to yours, but the utility of the setup soon got me over that and now I don't even notice. The TA Pro Vis is an alternative to do a wide double, but frankly I think they look worse than exposed tabs

Personally, I find trying to maintain a fast cadence on steep ground kills me within 5 minutes - I find it much more efficient to choose a slightly higher gear and a more plodding cadence.

I completely agree. When I hit a steep hill and change down I'm always tempted to thrash away at a ridiculous cadence and that way I know I'll burn out. So I always try to slow my cadence just a bit on hills and really pace myself. I'll alternate between sitting and riding out of the saddle as this seems to spread
the effort between a few muscle groups and also just breaks the monotony of long climbs.

My experience is that every LBS considers 30:34 (that is, 34 on the back...) to be ridiculously low already, and "any lower than that and you might as well walk".

It's true that a lot of bicycle store employees don't really "get" touring, and especially, do not understand the gearing requirements for all-day, fully-loaded riding in hilly terrains. And I have met a number of younger bicycle store employees who have not cottoned on to the fact that the second law of thermodynamics -- everything in the universe is breaking down -- applies to human bodies, especially OLDER human bodies!

I sometimes find it necessary to insist on particular gearing. I have been riding bicycles for over 40 years, including a dozen years since turning 40, so I damn well know what kind of gearing I need!

I really think(as with everything in life, I guess) that it just depends on the situation. On my last tour, I went with my buddy who was riding a Fuji Royale we had pieced together just a week before leaving. We used an old 10-speed rear wheel(5-speed cassette) so his bottom gear couldn't have been lower than 30-26. I had my LHT with a bottom gear of 26-34. We went through the heart of Colorado, doing a pass for every day on the road, some over 11,000 ft, and over 11% grades.

The ******* beat me to the top every time.

I noticed he was just used to a rediculously low cadence compared to me, and he took a while to drop to his lowest gear. He could just put a lot of power to the wheels with a slow pedal stroke. If you're used to a high cadence, you're going to need lower gears. If you're going through Colorado, you're going to need lower gears. If you're used to low cadence, and you're riding through Kansas, you're probably not going to need a granny ring.

Even at the steepest parts, in my bottom gear, there was no way I would rather get off and push. You're touring to be on your bike, right?

Perhaps I should have put double in quotation marks. All I did was to use the middle and inner rings of a 110/74 Sugino XD triple. I adjusted the chain line a bit and it works very well.

Using the triple I found that the outer ring (48 or 46) wasn't really necessary and the middle (36) was just a bit too small. So I figured a 42 ring combined with a 12x34 or 11x 34 9 speed cassette was perfect for my riding pace of between 14 and 18 mph. And a 26 inner ring would give me gears down to 21" for the mountains and the 16 teeth difference between the rings was still within an Ultegra double FD range. In fact the derailleurs that get used for compact cranks are good for a wide double too.

You need a set of crank bolts for a single ring to mount the 42 ring on the inner position and you'll have to move the crank a few mm out by adjusting the BB cartridge to get the chain line right. Also the gap between the FD and the 42 ring will have to be larger than usual to get chainstay clearance, but it works well. I can use both front rings on all 9 rear cogs, although I usually avoid this because of the poor chain line. I ride 90% of the time on the 42 ring and only go to the 26 in hilly terrain.

I really really like this, nun. I was just thinking how I really don't need the tippy top gear on my 48. That a 42 or 44 would access all the gears I need, except in the mountains. Glad to hear someone's doing it.

http://www.abundantadventures.com/quads.html
Because a 16 tooth granny gear is what you really need.

Pm sent.

I completely agree. When I hit a steep hill and change down I'm always tempted to thrash away at a ridiculous cadence and that way I know I'll burn out. So I always try to slow my cadence just a bit on hills and really pace myself. I'll alternate between sitting and riding out of the saddle as this seems to spread
the effort between a few muscle groups and also just breaks the monotony of long climbs.

This is obviously a personal preference, but let me chime in for the other side. I find cadences below ~75 rpm quite uncomfortable, so I like having the 22T granny. Not just for the lowest gear, but also to have a better selection of gears at the low end.

When I did my last big tour, the Trek 520 was mostly the only game in town, and it came stock with a road triple. We saw lots of people suffering up hills in that 30T, so I always associated stock gearing as being way too high. Now that "trekking" cranks are more common, it's probably less of an issue.

This is obviously a personal preference, but let me chime in for the other side. I find cadences below ~75 rpm quite uncomfortable, so I like having the 22T granny. Not just for the lowest gear, but also to have a better selection of gears at the low end.

When I did my last big tour, the Trek 520 was mostly the only game in town, and it came stock with a road triple. We saw lots of people suffering up hills in that 30T, so I always associated stock gearing as being way too high. Now that "trekking" cranks are more common, it's probably less of an issue.

I'm with you on the stock gearing being too high, however, as I tend to ride hills alternately in and out of the saddle I like to keep the gear in a range where my cadence is a little slower so I can get out of the saddle and not have too manic of a leg turn

Hi,

too technical this topic: I have a standard Shimano LX. I use to climb mountains in the 3rd lowest gear. The 1st and 2nd are "spare gears". I use the 2nd for more 20% grades and the 1st lowest for more than 25% grades (or if I'm tired)
But these grades you'll find mostly in hilly areas and seldom in montainous areas...

Thomas