Touring - Double Crankset Gearing

It's a question I've searched for but having a problem finding a simple answer for. Is a 34/50 on a double crankset with a 12-36 cassette going to be low enough for loaded up touring ?

I think the 50 is going to help prevent me from spinning out, but trying to get some local expert advice.

I run a Sram X7 26/39 double along with an 11/32 or 11/34 running 10 speed Ultegra shifters and XT RD. Either is plenty low for me to ride up anything I've ever come across. For loaded touring in hilly country you may find that 34/36 a little high for your liking.

I can comfortably spin for with the 39 ring and 11 cassette. When I'm touring I really don't worry about hammering down the hills like I do when riding my TCR. That combo allows me to cruise along with zero issues.

Only place you will spin out that 50/12 is down big hills.

It's a question I've searched for but having a problem finding a simple answer for. Is a 34/50 on a double crankset with a 12-36 cassette going to be low enough for loaded up touring ?

I think the 50 is going to help prevent me from spinning out, but trying to get some local expert advice.

Depends how loaded up you are. Most folks need a minimum 20 gear inch low and anything over 80 is rarely used other than to go even faster down hill. 34F/ 36R gives you around 27 gear inches - not low enough IMHO.

After my first loaded mini-tour (with some hills in it and a windy day), one of the clear conclusions was that 25 gear inches (the lowest gear that my bike has) is not low enough for me. The touring bike I am currently building will have 16 gear inches as the lowest gear (22/34 with 26x1.5 tires).

It's a question I've searched for but having a problem finding a simple answer for. Is a 34/50 on a double crankset with a 12-36 cassette going to be low enough for loaded up touring ?

I think the 50 is going to help prevent me from spinning out, but trying to get some local expert advice.

Most tourists would say that your gearing is too high. You don't need the 50; spinning out is part of the fun and most tourists are going to freewheel down the hills.

A good range to go for id 100 to 20 gear inches. The 12-36 cassette is good, but look at using combos like 44-30, 42-26 etc on the crank

Another vote for not low enough, here. I barely got away with 26 front / 32 rear on my first bike, and when it was time to get a new bike I went with 22 in front.

That's for a full camping/cooking load.

I'm in the "it depends" crowd.

If you expect to climb all day with 50 pounds of gear for weeks in a row, it isn't low enough.

If you're dealing with moderate or minimal hills, have 20 pounds of gear, and have the power, a compact double with a wide cassette is sufficient.

Is a 34/50 on a double crankset with a 12-36 cassette going to be low enough for loaded up touring ?

Not unless you can pack everything you need in 15-20lbs. Or your touring route is completely flat.

It's a question I've searched for but having a problem finding a simple answer for. Is a 34/50 on a double crankset with a 12-36 cassette going to be low enough for loaded up touring ?

I think the 50 is going to help prevent me from spinning out, but trying to get some local expert advice.

Gearing is something of a touchy subject. Racer dudes fall into the camp of anything less than a 53/42 with an 11-15 10 speed cassette is too Fredish for them. Freds/tourist/retro grouches will tell you that you only need a 34/30/18 crank with a 28-36 4 speed cassette and anything else is just too macho racer dude for them to associate with you.

Mountain bikers (and wise tourists who have functioning knees) fall into a group that realize the utility of very low...perhaps stupidly low...gears. If you have to pedal your bike to the top of a hill that you probably shouldn't be walking up, you need low gears to do it. Once on top of the hill, you probably don't want to spend all your time coasting back down it so you need gears that you can actually pedal.

While I ride everything, I have a slight edge in mountain biking experience and tend to err on the side of the mountain bikers. I also live in an area that is uphill from everywhere. I have triple cranks on every single bike I own and everyone of them but the go fast bike have 11-34 rear cassettes. My touring bike has my lowest gears...46/34/20 crank...and I've used the lowest and highest on several tours. Sometimes within yards of each other:eek:

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r181/cyccommute/Twisting%20down%20the%20alley/IMGP1741.jpg

That's a 50 mph downhill across the way and a 4 mph uphill.

If you are new to touring, I'd say to get as low a low as you can and a reasonable high. (about 100 gear inches is a reasonable high). If you find that you aren't using the low or the high, you can always change the gearing later.

Yet another vote for not low enough. I have recently been trying to convert my Mercian Road bike to a touring bike while keeping my Sugino double up front and decided it's a lost cause. The smallest ring you can use on a 110 double is 33t and I know I would be begging for a lower gear. Perhaps if you live and tour only in flatter areas it might work but not here in southern BC.

I was calculating gear ratios and not intending for anyone else to read it but here it is anyway. The percentage after the first equals sign is the one to look at. I am used to a 24/32 but the best I could do with the Mercian is a 33/36 and that doesn't come close enough.

BTW, Shimano says you need a Shadow rear derailleur to use their 36t cassette or you have to replace the B-tension bolt with a longer one for a non Shadow derailleur.

Kayakdiver, I like the idea of your mountain double and if I build up another touring bike, I will probably do the same.

26”x2=206
24/32=0.75x206=154.5cm 60.83”
26/32=0.8125x206=167.4cm 65.9”
26/30=0.87x206=178.5cm 70.3”
26/28=0.93x206=191.58cm 75.4”

622x28mm=214
34/32=1.06x214=227.4cm 89.5”
34/34=1x214=214cm 84.2”
34/36=.94x214=202cm 79.5”
33/36=.92x214=196cm 77”
33/32=1.03x214=220cm
33/34=0.97x214=208cm
30/32=.94x214=201cm 79”
30/34=0.88x214=189cm 74”
30/36=0.833x214=178.33cm 70”

Yet another vote for not low enough. I have recently been trying to convert my Mercian Road bike to a touring bike while keeping my Sugino double up front and decided it's a lost cause. The smallest ring you can use on a 110 double is 33t and I know I would be begging for a lower gear. Perhaps if you live and tour only in flatter areas it might work but not here in southern BC.

I was calculating gear ratios and not intending for anyone else to read it but here it is anyway. The percentage after the first equals sign is the one to look at. I am used to a 24/32 but the best I could do with the Mercian is a 33/36 and that doesn't come close enough.

BTW, Shimano says you need a Shadow rear derailleur to use their 36t cassette or you have to replace the B-tension bolt with a longer one for a non Shadow derailleur.

Kayakdiver, I like the idea of your mountain double and if I build up another touring bike, I will probably do the same.

26”x2=206
24/32=0.75x206=154.5cm 60.83”
26/32=0.8125x206=167.4cm 65.9”
26/30=0.87x206=178.5cm 70.3”
26/28=0.93x206=191.58cm 75.4”

622x28mm=214
34/32=1.06x214=227.4cm 89.5”
34/34=1x214=214cm 84.2”
34/36=.94x214=202cm 79.5”
33/36=.92x214=196cm 77”
33/32=1.03x214=220cm
33/34=0.97x214=208cm
30/32=.94x214=201cm 79”
30/34=0.88x214=189cm 74”
30/36=0.833x214=178.33cm 70”

I really love the setup... You would be very pleased if you decided to go this route. Some might say that a 39 big ring is pretty low but at 100 rpm on the 11/39 you are looking at approx 24mph.. plenty fast for any touring I'm doing.

Yet another vote for not low enough. I have recently been trying to convert my Mercian Road bike to a touring bike while keeping my Sugino double up front and decided it's a lost cause. The smallest ring you can use on a 110 double is 33t and I know I would be begging for a lower gear. Perhaps if you live and tour only in flatter areas it might work but not here in southern BC.



Crank choice basically depends on what BB interface you have and then on the rings you need. To get good touring gears with a double you could use the Sugino 110/74 double and do 42/26 or 40/24. Or a less expensive way is to use a 110/74 triple and just use the middle and inner ring positions. That's what I do. I have a 42/26 with an 11/34 cassette and get the following ratios

103.1 63.8
87.2 54.0
75.6 46.8
66.7 41.3
56.7 35.1
49.3 30.5
43.6 27.0
37.8 23.4
33.4 20.6

Most days I never come out of the 42 ring and the 26 ring is just for the really steep stuff.

Nun,
Seeing your Ramboulet was what gave me the incentive to get my Mercian more tour ready. The smallest ring you can use on a 110 double is a 33t which is made by TA. That's the smallest that exists in a 110 spacing. If I am wrong, let me know because I would love to buy it.

VO has a 50.4 double which comes with 30-46 and they will soon be stocking even smaller rings. That and it looks pretty sharp as well.

http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/components/cranksets/cranks/grand-cru-50-4bcd-crankset.html

I use the exact gearing you're thinking of on my long distance bike (nashbar crank50/34 to 12-36, with deore derailler, flipped the b-screw), but I live in a countryside where the hills rarely exceed 400m and a ride might have a big climb of 50m, so I don't need anything lower but you can swap the innner ring for a 30 and get lower without much expense... my inner ring is steel too. I could manage credit card touring with my setup but would want to haul a lot of gear with it either.

I plan on putting MTB gearing on my heavy touring bike though, it just makes sense for a fella my size.

I
s a 34/50 on a double crankset with a 12-36 cassette going to be low enough for loaded up touring ?


1:1 low, a 34:34, Might be OK, If you don't mind walking some hills.

my derailleur touring rig , 13-32 cogs, 110-74 , 50,38,24 ..
24:32 = 1:0.75

now with the cassette hubs, offering 12t cogs, no need for the 52.
you can function with a 48 outer.

Found ,for my longest tour 95" gear, was high enough.

A 50/14 on a 700-35 wheel.

YMMV

Gearing is something of a touchy subject. Racer dudes fall into the camp of anything less than a 53/42 with an 11-15 10 speed cassette is too Fredish for them. Freds/tourist/retro grouches will tell you that you only need a 34/30/18 crank with a 28-36 4 speed cassette and anything else is just too macho racer dude for them to associate with you.

Mountain bikers (and wise tourists who have functioning knees) fall into a group that realize the utility of very low...perhaps stupidly low...gears. If you have to pedal your bike to the top of a hill that you probably shouldn't be walking up, you need low gears to do it. Once on top of the hill, you probably don't want to spend all your time coasting back down it so you need gears that you can actually pedal.

While I ride everything, I have a slight edge in mountain biking experience and tend to err on the side of the mountain bikers. I also live in an area that is uphill from everywhere. I have triple cranks on every single bike I own and everyone of them but the go fast bike have 11-34 rear cassettes. My touring bike has my lowest gears...46/34/20 crank...and I've used the lowest and highest on several tours. Sometimes within yards of each other:eek:

If you are new to touring, I'd say to get as low a low as you can and a reasonable high. (about 100 gear inches is a reasonable high). If you find that you aren't using the low or the high, you can always change the gearing later.

Well put Mr Perkins, I especially liked the Fred/retro grouch comparison. Yup, I agree a 20-100 g.i. range is a good target. Ive used a 21 to maybe 105 g.i. and that always worked well.

I run a Sram X7 26/39 double along with an 11/32 or 11/34 running 10 speed Ultegra shifters and XT RD. Either is plenty low for me to ride up anything I've ever come across. For loaded touring in hilly country you may find that 34/36 a little high for your liking.

I can comfortably spin for with the 39 ring and 11 cassette. When I'm touring I really don't worry about hammering down the hills like I do when riding my TCR. That combo allows me to cruise along with zero issues.

Only place you will spin out that 50/12 is down big hills.

Specifically, which XT RD and, more importantly which FD do you use with the Ultegra STI shifters? I am assuming you are using STI's....

I've been riding mtn bikes, cargo bikes, folding bikes, electric bikes but just got out my old Sekai 2500 to do some road riding and maybe touring again. It's been 25 years since I've done any touring. I used it all the time and toured across the top of the US a number of times. The front rings are 50, 40 and the rear which I LOWERED to 14, 32. I can't believe I carried 80 lbs of stuff over the Rockies and Cascades so many times with these gears. Ah, youth is wasted on the young.

Specifically, which XT RD and, more importantly which FD do you use with the Ultegra STI shifters? I am assuming you are using STI's....

Just about any XT will work with the exception of the Dynasys derailers. Even a Rapid Rise would work. The shifting is just 'backwards'. On the positive side, both shifters move in the same direction from high to low gear.

For the front derailer, use a Tiagra for wide range gearing because they are wider between the inner and outer plate. That makes the Tiagra - both double and triple - more forgiving than their more expensive brothers.

Specifically, which XT RD and, more importantly which FD do you use with the Ultegra STI shifters? I am assuming you are using STI's....

XT Long Cage and Tiagra up front with STI's.

Just about any XT will work with the exception of the Dynasys derailers. Even a Rapid Rise would work. The shifting is just 'backwards'. On the positive side, both shifters move in the same direction from high to low gear.

For the front derailer, use a Tiagra for wide range gearing because they are wider between the inner and outer plate. That makes the Tiagra - both double and triple - more forgiving than their more expensive brothers.


XT Long Cage and Tiagra up front with STI's.

This is very useful. It is very good to know that at an Ultegra 10 speed STI will make a Tiagra FD shift from and to a 39t big ring. I don't think that this is well known as I am aware of two people who have struggled unsuccessfully with the 9sp to 10sp conversion with "touring" chainrings. Co-Motion was clueless - or more likely too cautious to say anything but push bar ends.

This is very useful. It is very good to know that at an Ultegra 10 speed STI will make a Tiagra FD shift from and to a 39t big ring. I don't think that this is well known as I am aware of two people who have struggled unsuccessfully with the 9sp to 10sp conversion with "touring" chainrings. Co-Motion was clueless - or more likely too cautious to say anything but push bar ends.

The Tiagra is a true diamond in the rough compared to the 105 and Ultegra. The more expensive derailers are pretty and they shift nice but they are a pain to set up because they are so narrow. I've found the same to be true with mountain bike fronts. The expensive ones are very nice but they will drive you crazy on set up.

The Tiagra is a true diamond in the rough compared to the 105 and Ultegra. The more expensive derailers are pretty and they shift nice but they are a pain to set up because they are so narrow. I've found the same to be true with mountain bike fronts. The expensive ones are very nice but they will drive you crazy on set up.

I agree, a few weeks ago I changed the cable on my Tiagra FD and reset everything as I had screwed it up a bit at the end of last season--I was pleasantly surprised how easy it was setting it up (last fall I had been a bit of a doofus with it and mucked it up, the cable as well from tightening, loosening, tightening, loosening)
Found some online step by step stuff for setting up a fd and it worked like a charm, with the trim stuff working right on from the beginning.

nhorton, You'll probably be fine for the majority of your touring miles. That said, I have to admit that stupid low gearing is nice and maybe more importantly, fun.

Brad

I did a credit card tour in VT last summer with about 27" as my lowest gear. I was carrying about 20lbs. I'm a clyde and did several 5 mile climbs at about 8%. Having said that, if I were carrying a tent, sleeping bag and cooking gear, I'd want something around 20 gear inches.

27" used to be the standard low gear for touring bikes in the '80s and you are aiming lower than that. It'll work fine, though you may want to walk some hills. No big deal, except for some people's egos. Down the track, you might lower the gearing a bit more.

27" used to be the standard low gear for touring bikes in the '80s and you are aiming lower than that. It'll work fine, though you may want to walk some hills. No big deal, except for some people's egos. Down the track, you might lower the gearing a bit more.

And we were all 30 years younger in the 80s:rolleyes:...well, some of us were:eek: A 27" low gear was dumb for loaded touring in the 1980s and it hasn't gotten any smarter. Especially when you consider that you can do much better than that now much more easily. Even a standard road triple (52/39/30) is easy to set up with a gear that is lower than 27 gear inches.

Pedaling to the top of something isn't about ego, it's about efficiency. Walking requires more energy than riding. Even at walking speed.

It's a question I've searched for but having a problem finding a simple answer for. Is a 34/50 on a double crankset with a 12-36 cassette going to be low enough for loaded up touring ?

I think the 50 is going to help prevent me from spinning out, but trying to get some local expert advice.

That's because there is no simple answer. It depends on fitness, route, duration, etc., etc.

Pedaling to the top of something isn't about ego, it's about efficiency. Walking requires more energy than riding. Even at walking speed.

If saving the effort between walking and riding at walking pace is so important, I suggest using a motorcycle, rather than a bicycle. Big savings in effort there. Personally, I've not felt the need for sub-27" gears for on-road touring but YMMV, of course.

Given that a few folk cycletour on fixed gears and 3 speeds, perhaps you are over-egging the need for very low gears, particularly you don't know the OP's fitness, intended touring plans and preferences regarding taking an occasional walk.

wab--really comes down to how much weight you have and what sort of hills you are on. Of course one can tour on a 3 speed, but if you have in fact ever toured carrying a good 40lbs or more and encountered long steep hills, you will know that having low gearing in the 20 to low 20s gear inch range really is a plus.

You can disagree, but pushing a bike with 40-50 lbs on it up a steep hill is much more tiring in my personal experience, than riding up it with low gearing--its the old "been there, done that" routine for me, have no inclination to revisit that.

cassettes with wide ranges, 9 or 10 speed gearing, all allow for near 20 gear inches AND a good range of middle and high--it just works.

you do sound a bit like the Python skit "oh when I was a lad, we lived in a wet carbboard box.....etc etc"
In the end, it depends on what terrain, what weight carrying, but why limit yourself to 27 g.i when its easy to have lower, if you dont use it, fine. But dont let ego about low gearing affect it.

cheers

I did a century with my 50/34 and 12-36 and I still don't think this is something I would use to haul my 220lbs + gear up and down big hills all day... I'm not the fittest rider in the world but then again I'm quite happy to spin out on the downhills and coast for a while.

Just about any XT will work with the exception of the Dynasys derailers. Even a Rapid Rise would work. The shifting is just 'backwards'. On the positive side, both shifters move in the same direction from high to low gear.

For the front derailer, use a Tiagra for wide range gearing because they are wider between the inner and outer plate. That makes the Tiagra - both double and triple - more forgiving than their more expensive brothers.

Interesting. Sorry to hijack but this is relevant to the discussion. I am building up an Xtracycle that I will also try touring on to see how it goes. Ironically, I have everything but the FD for my gearing. I'm running an XT FC-M770 triple, Shimano SL-BS77 9-speed Double / Triple Bar End Shifters, and Shimano XT RD-772 (11-34)

So I just ordered a Tiagra FD for 31 bucks from Amazon/Niagara Cycle based off of this post. Timely info on this thread. Much appreciated.

For the Tour of Colorado in two weeks, I have been training on my Pinarello with compact (50/30, 10 spd 11-28). Up and down the hills, many miles, I was going to do it THEN, a Colorado resident, cyclist friend of mine (who knows the TofC routes very well) said to me, "If you were 20 years younger and 30 pounds lighter, I'd STILL tell you to use a triple on those roads".
This week, I built a 19.6 lb aluminum bike ( w/pdls) and an Ultegra triple (52/40/30, 10 spd 11-28) and went for a test ride. Two tubes, booties, pump, id, cell phone, ipod, two full water bottles, etc. replicating what I'll have in Colorado(about 28 total pounds). I rode up my "test mountain" (8-11% grade, 8 miles). It was wonderful! I didn't even need to use 1st or 2nd gear but so nice to know it's there if I need it though. With the compact, I was always in 1st/2nd gear in the mountains....with no more lower choices! BTW, the triple added just a few grams to the bike's weight. Raydog

wab--really comes down to how much weight you have and what sort of hills you are on. Of course one can tour on a 3 speed, but if you have in fact ever toured carrying a good 40lbs or more and encountered long steep hills, you will know that having low gearing in the 20 to low 20s gear inch range really is a plus.

You can disagree, but pushing a bike with 40-50 lbs on it up a steep hill is much more tiring in my personal experience, than riding up it with low gearing--its the old "been there, done that" routine for me, have no inclination to revisit that.

cassettes with wide ranges, 9 or 10 speed gearing, all allow for near 20 gear inches AND a good range of middle and high--it just works.

you do sound a bit like the Python skit "oh when I was a lad, we lived in a wet carbboard box.....etc etc"
In the end, it depends on what terrain, what weight carrying, but why limit yourself to 27 g.i when its easy to have lower, if you dont use it, fine. But dont let ego about low gearing affect it.

cheers
:thumb::thumb::thumb:

thanks Mr Perkins

We are disagreeing about a difference of perhaps 5 gear inches at most; the OP is proposing a sub-27" bottom gear anyway. Interesting that such a small difference is worth all the heat. Feel free to do whatever you wish, I'll do the same.

Wab, I realize that. I'm looking at this from the learning aspect of threads like this for people who have not toured and may form opinions on what is "accepted gearing" for touring, what will be "ok" and/or what bike they will actually buy.

A good example I have is the wife of a friend who bought this bike last summer:

http://www.mec.ca/Products/product_detail.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=845524442630195&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302886469

in its blurb it specifically states on a few occasions:

"This multi-purpose bike can also be used for general city riding or long-haul touring"

"FSA Omega 30-39-50T triple crank with Shimano® 12-25 9-speed cassette provide plenty of gear options for powering up hills and over flat terrain."

they bought the bike, and soon enough realized that the gearing wasnt that low and wished it was lower. A 30 granny with 25 cassette is 32 gear inches, yes a lot higher than 27, but I use this case to show that gearing is not always a detail that people look at closely, and in the context we are discussing, ie touring, lower than 25 gear inches certainly makes a bike more versatile for putting a bit more weight and dealing with steep, long hills.

Of course as you say, the weight on your bike, your age, your fitness, the terrain, these all play into it.

I see internet forums to be a neat resource for getting informed opinions on things, and if my friend had taken a bit more time looking at specs, she would have realized its gearing was a bit too high. It was a quick decision buy, its a nice bike, I just dont get why they didnt put a longer cage derailleur on it with a wider range cassette. I guess it would have cost a few more dollars and the bean counters didnt want that.
Yes I realize a 12-25 has nice tight gear ratios, but this bike will be bought by people who try touring, its not going to be bought by hard core cyclo-cross racers, but that is what they seemed to have aimed the specs at gearing wise (and/or bean counters played a part)

Part of the pricing of a Bike is taking the Gear sets the manufacturer sells,
at a given price.. to an OEM, that's a pallet of cases price.
then the have people put the stuff on, and wrap it, and put it in a box.

then at the retail shop, you change chainrings and cassettes if you wish.

They didn't do it because MEC's bikes are just bikesdirect with a different paint scheme and a hefty assembly fee in the markup. I wouldn't recommend a MEC bike over an LBS... most of them end up as garage queens I'd reckon anyway.

A triple and a 12-36 cassette can give anyone the highs and the lows they crave... really though, we're all coming from different places and perspectives on this and the terrain we ride is a big part of this... given the cassettes available today I can't really think of a good reason to forgo lower gears when building up a bike for non-competitive use.

A triple and a 12-36 cassette can give anyone the highs and the lows they crave... really though, we're all coming from different places and perspectives on this and the terrain we ride is a big part of this... given the cassettes available today I can't really think of a good reason to forgo lower gears when building up a bike for non-competitive use.

I agree. With 9 speed cassettes, you can have a wide range and still have pretty close ratios, in fact better than the old 14-28 5 speed clusters back in the day.

I live in a city with long, steep hills. Maybe a difference of 5 gear inches doesn't matter to some, but for me, the difference between an 27 and a 22 low gear is huge!