Southern California - Climbing SoCal hills & mountains

Just wondering what people use for their drive train. I currently have a 53/39 and 12/26 which requires a fair amount of pedal pressure to get up a big hill.

For some of the hillier centuries around here, do folks use compact cranks or is this just a matter of needing to HTFU?

My current line of thinking is that a 50/34 and 11/28 (I think a normal SRAM RD will accommodate 28 but not 32) will improve my success rate with hills. That nets me a low gear of 31.9 inches instead of my current 39.5 inches.

Thoughts?

For years I thought a 39-27 was as low as anyone needed. Then last year I rode the Mount Laguna Bike Classic.
Anyone who says you simply need to HTFU hasn't ridden MLBC or l'Etape.
I'll probably be the only guy riding with a triple at l'Etape next weekend, but I bet I'll finish before a LOT of guys with 39-27s & 28s. :)

For years I thought a 39-27 was as low as anyone needed. Then last year I rode the Mount Laguna Bike Classic.
Anyone who says you simply need to HTFU hasn't ridden MLBC or l'Etape.
I'll probably be the only guy riding with a triple at l'Etape next weekend, but I bet I'll finish before a LOT of guys with 39-27s & 28s. :)

In the LA area I can climb pretty much anything with a 39x25, but that was *way* too big for me on Pine Creek Rd saturday for Mt. Laguna. Lots of people with smaller gearing than I had were also walking their bikes. My girlfriend, on the other hand, rode Pine Creek with a 38x23 and didn't get off to walk at all. She's also ridden Towne Pass into Death Valley on a ~76" fixed gear. Most things we ride together I ride one tooth smaller in back, but when it gets steeper than 20% or so she has a big strength to weight advantage.

So what gearing you should ride is what works for you.

Just wondering what people use for their drive train. I currently have a 53/39 and 12/26 which requires a fair amount of pedal pressure to get up a big hill.

For some of the hillier centuries around here, do folks use compact cranks or is this just a matter of needing to HTFU?

My current line of thinking is that a 50/34 and 11/28 (I think a normal SRAM RD will accommodate 28 but not 32) will improve my success rate with hills. That nets me a low gear of 31.9 inches instead of my current 39.5 inches.

Thoughts?

I'm guessing that the jump from 39 to 34 in front AND 26 to 28 in back would be a huge jump, but that is a completely un-edumacted guess. How much lower do you want to go? A little or a lot? If a little, I'd try the change in the rear first to see what that does for you. If you want a lot, I'd go compact first and then the cassette if you have to. Better yet, do you have any friends with a compact that would let you try it?

I've ordered a compact with 12/25, if memory serves me right.

Swapping the rings on the front crank is pretty straight forward - shouldn't need to replace the entire crank, just the rings. Have your LBS put on compact rings and go ride for a bit. If it works - you're set. Keep in mind that with a compact you'll gain some ease of effort on the uphills but lose the power/speed on the flats that the big ring gives you. A buddy of mine went from the big rings to the compact - and is happy with the change. If you don't need the top end, then make the switch.I went from a compact w/12-27 to a mid-compact 52-36 w/rear 11-28. Seems to bit a nice compromise for me.

I use a 50-34 up front, 11-28 out back. Anything over 10% grade is still a chore.

I don't think I've ever wished I had a 53 up front, and the only time I use the 34 chainring is on climbs so I don't know why I'd ever want to make that harder with a 39 (unless I somehow gained 200w of power).

For years I thought a 39-27 was as low as anyone needed. Then last year I rode the Mount Laguna Bike Classic.
Anyone who says you simply need to HTFU hasn't ridden MLBC or l'Etape.
I'll probably be the only guy riding with a triple at l'Etape next weekend, but I bet I'll finish before a LOT of guys with 39-27s & 28s.

A triple would be too spendy at this point, what with the different shifters and all. Frankly, I think you'd finish ahead of me on a fixie, but that's besides the point. :D


In the LA area I can climb pretty much anything with a 39x25, but that was *way* too big for me on Pine Creek Rd saturday for Mt. Laguna. .

That's the problem - I can manage 39/26 for just about anything if it's not too long, but I went up Red Rock in vegas last month and it was 6 miles or so of 10-12% and I was DYING. It'd be nice to have a lower gear to help out a bit when the hill is really long, that's my thought.


Swapping the rings on the front crank is pretty straight forward - shouldn't need to replace the entire crank, just the rings. Have your LBS put on compact rings and go ride for a bit. If it works - you're set. Keep in mind that with a compact you'll gain some ease of effort on the uphills but lose the power/speed on the flats that the big ring gives you. A buddy of mine went from the big rings to the compact - and is happy with the change. If you don't need the top end, then make the switch.I went from a compact w/12-27 to a mid-compact 52-36 w/rear 11-28. Seems to bit a nice compromise for me.

False - my crank has 130 bolt centers, compact cranks have 110, so I can't just try out smaller chainrings. Also, by changing from a 12 tooth cog to 11, and 53 to 50, I'll actually pick up just a tiny bit on the top end, so that's not really a problem.


I use a 50-34 up front, 11-28 out back. Anything over 10% grade is still a chore.

I don't think I've ever wished I had a 53 up front, and the only time I use the 34 chainring is on climbs so I don't know why I'd ever want to make that harder with a 39 (unless I somehow gained 200w of power).

Alright, I think that's just the answer I'm looking for. Switching to a compact is pretty straightforward, requires only a new crank (and cassette in this case). A triple would be buxx. Let me know if you find the magic fountain of 200 extra watts. :thumb:

Just keep a Mtn RD, a mtn cassette, and longer chain possibly, in your parts bin. Swap them out as needed.

Hm, didn't even think of that - a 39/36 would be lower than 34/28, and possibly less expensive pending the outcome of a few crank auctions I'm watching right now. Thanks

I use a 34/50 compact on the front and an 11-32 mountain bike cassette (SRAM) with an XX rear derailluer (also SRAM) and it works fine.

Gets me up everything including the Baldy Ski Lift climb, Potrero Road on Grand Tour, Descending (when I'm ascending) Rd. and other 18% plus climbs. YMMV of course.

Rick / OCRR

For years I rode a triple on my road bike but recently bought a bike with Sram Apex. The front is 50/34 and the rear is 11-32.

I really like it :)

Funny how things have changed. I rode GMR/GRR the year before last after being away from it for more than 20 years, and I couldn't believe how easy it was!
It didn't make any sense; sure I'd just gotten a powermeter and was riding high with all the performance gains, but I was practically yawning while coasting up GMR with an extra 25+ pounds than I wasn't carrying up the hill at 17, back when GMR seemed so hard! I imagined myself being some freak of nature/ultimate late-bloomer who would turn the cycling world upside down...

...then I remembered that we were all riding a 42x21's back in 1986.

I've accumulated 71,964 feet of climbing since March 15 (http://app.strava.com/challenges/specialized-classic), most of it with 30 triple front / 28 rear. But I'm weak and overweight. When I get faster and lighter, I'm interested in Ultegra Di2 drivetrain. It only works with double cranks, but I read that it can be configured to work with 32 rear. 39/32 is only 14% higher than my current setup.

Funny how things have changed. I rode GMR/GRR the year before last after being away from it for more than 20 years, and I couldn't believe how easy it was! .


Son of a ***! :twitchy:



...then I remembered that we were all riding a 42x21's back in 1986.


Oh, ha ha. Back when 10 speed really meant 10 speeds. :thumb:

I've accumulated 71,964 feet of climbing since March 15 (http://app.strava.com/challenges/specialized-classic), most of it with 30 triple front / 28 rear. But I'm weak and overweight. When I get faster and lighter, I'm interested in Ultegra Di2 drivetrain. It only works with double cranks, but I read that it can be configured to work with 32 rear. 39/32 is only 14% higher than my current setup.

Wouldn't compact do the trick in this case? They are almost equal... 30/28 vs 34/32.

I wouldn't want to ride anything that required lower gearing than 34x28 (I'd be miserable). A triple really is ideal if you do a lot of climbing IMO.

Wouldn't compact do the trick in this case? They are almost equal... 30/28 vs 34/32.

It would, but who knows, maybe I'll find 53/11 useful some day?

50-34/11-32 combo has a narrower range of gears than what I have right now. 53-39/11-32 has a higher lowest gear and a slightly higher highest gear. I'm not in a particular hurry to upgrade since Ultegra Di2 costs a truckload of money (~$1300) and I should be more than 14% faster by the time I have the extra money. 53-39 would make more sense.

It's not that I do a lot of climbing - far from it. I just don't want to NOT do any climbing. Most of the cool places to cycle in So Cal are up a mountain road, or at least that's what it seems like from ground level here. :)

[QUOTE=TrojanHorse;14139751Most of the cool places to cycle in So Cal are up a mountain road, or at least that's what it seems like from ground level here. :)[/QUOTE]

Yes TrojanHorse, You are correct!

Rick / OCRR

I love my tripple but find if I am not riding in the mountains I never use the small ring now days. Back when I wasn't in shape I needed it but not nearly now.

You just don't want me to make it up GMR before you do! ;)

I've accumulated 71,964 feet of climbing since March 15 (http://app.strava.com/challenges/specialized-classic), most of it with 30 triple front / 28 rear. But I'm weak and overweight. When I get faster and lighter, I'm interested in Ultegra Di2 drivetrain. It only works with double cranks, but I read that it can be configured to work with 32 rear. 39/32 is only 14% higher than my current setup.


Weak and overweight? I thought you are the guy on the left in this picture:


(http://www.flickr.com/photos/chriskostman/7109877841/in/set-72157629890792365)http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8152/7109877841_0f8a8b51dc.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/chriskostman/7109877841/)
adventurecorps.com 25 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/chriskostman/7109877841/) by Chris Kostman / AdventureCORPS (http://www.flickr.com/people/chriskostman/), on Flickr


Weak? I don't know about that, but I don't see anyone in that picture that 'looks' overweight!

Ha ha. Thanks, but I'm heavier than I look. I weigh 158-160 at the moment. With my height, I can lose another 20 lbs.

I run a 50/34 - 12/27.
I'm in my mid 50's. When I wake up and hop on my bike, hill climbing sounds quite adventurous. Then I start up the hill and I realize the beer is the other way!!!
All kidding aside (I don't even drink) I don't spend a great deal of time climbing but when I do my combo seems to work well for me.

Great post - I've seen the climbing skills of many of the people on here so it is nice to know what gearing everyone is using (I have a long way to go to get into great climbing shape - but at least I can now tune my bike more intelligently). I had a 53/39 for a long time and after battling various hills I finally broke down and put on a compact and it helped a lot. I am getting an 11/28 before BA, maybe I can keep up with some of this crowd for the first 100 yards... I would do a 32 in back but I'm told it wouldn't work with my Dura Ace set up (?). The 53 was great for hauling ass on a decline, but I haven't missed it.

I hear you. I just missed out on a nice SRAM crank today on fleabay. Dangit! They're really cheap right now but slightly less cheap than I am. Ha ha.

I use a 50-34 up front, 11-28 out back. Anything over 10% grade is still a chore...

I'm finding this Spring that a 50-34 / 12-28 is working pretty well on the hills I ride. It's good for up to a short/middle length 10-11% grades. I've pretty much retired my triple bike and will only use it when I know that I'll be doing more than that. (I'm 60 and it would serve me well to lose about 30 pounds. I'm also "pretty slow" when climbing, the proof is on Strava.)

I hear you. I just missed out on a nice SRAM crank today on fleabay. Dangit! They're really cheap right now but slightly less cheap than I am. Ha ha.

Ha ha - that's funny. I may go with an Ultrega 11/28 since it costs less than half of the Dura Ace and yet weighs about 40 gr more. Given my current weight, I doubt the few grams saved will help too much going up the mountain. But then again...

used to run 53/39 and 12-25, but switched over to compacts 50/34 and 11/23. Great for group rides and feels about the same going up palomar or GMR. BTW i'm about 210lbs if it matters...

I have chicken legs, run 50/34 12-32 up the hills. Getting better though, only drop down to 28 on rear lately, even up a 10 % grade.

I would do a 32 in back but I'm told it wouldn't work with my Dura Ace set up (?). The 53 was great for hauling ass on a decline, but I haven't missed it.i think you can swap a longer cage from another derailleur, not sure which one, xtr or ultegra long cage. also you can typically go more than shimano specs as the limit. adjusting the 'b' screw can get you a few more teeth range in the back. it's the one that sets the angle that the derailleur hangs at

i would borrow a few parts and see if you can make it work. try a 9 speed 11-32 mtn cassette (if you've got one lying around)on a road wheel with your bike on a stand and grab the cable with your hand to shift and see if the derailleur has the range to reach the big cogs. you've got to experiment to see if it works, shimano's (and any other manufacturer) recommendations are always going to be on the conservative side, you won't now til you try...

30 some post and not one mention of gear inches. That is the true gauge as to what gear ratio you are in,Goggle it.

30 some post and not one mention of gear inches. That is the true gauge as to what gear ratio you are in,Goggle it.

You obviously missed the original post.


Just wondering what people use for their drive train. I currently have a 53/39 and 12/26 which requires a fair amount of pedal pressure to get up a big hill.

For some of the hillier centuries around here, do folks use compact cranks or is this just a matter of needing to HTFU?

My current line of thinking is that a 50/34 and 11/28 (I think a normal SRAM RD will accommodate 28 but not 32) will improve my success rate with hills. That nets me a low gear of 31.9 inches instead of my current 39.5 inches.

Thoughts?

Honestly though, I know what 39/26 feels like, I have no idea what 32 gear inches feels like.

My triple is a 30-42-52 paired with a 12-26 rear. The gives me about 31 gear inches for climbing. Living in the Conejo, I ride the SM's nearly every weekend and honestly, I wouldn't mind having a 27 in the cassette! If I replace my almost 10 year old bike in the next year, I think I'll opt for the triple again, rather than deal with a compact and the larger gear jumps. Okay, there is a little weight penalty....but my knees don't care!

Thanks zzzzwillzzzz, I'll look into it. I may also google the info bob mentioned because, although i hate to admit it, I have no idea what gear inches factor means... I just know that I'd like a little, or a lot more leverage when trying to climb up the mountain. I'm in for BA this year, but I am getting real nervous.

A 39/28 will get you most places in Socal. If you are thinking Orange County. But yah, as most people said, Mulholland, Mt. Laguna, Big Bear, Baldy, you'll need a 34/28 at the min. Depends how strong you are. And a 50/11 ain't too shabby either for the flats. Its like 119 inch gear which is bigger than a 53/12. I think once you go lower than a 28 in the rear, you may have to change the derailleur, really depends on what you got there. I'll just grind it out on a 34/28 instead of buying a medium cage rear derailleur.

You obviously missed the original post.



Honestly though, I know what 39/26 feels like, I have no idea what 32 gear inches feels like.

Your right I did miss your mention of gear inches, sorry. To answer your other question, 32 gear inches can feel great when things get steep for many mile like Horseshoe Meadows or a number of other climbs in the Sierra's, Baldy too.

Your right I did miss your mention of gear inches, sorry. To answer your other question, 32 gear inches can feel great when things get steep for many mile like Horseshoe Meadows or a number of other climbs in the Sierra's, Baldy too.

Well, that's what I'm looking for. Now if only evilbay would cooperate. People seem to be dumping SRAM Red compact cranks right now - they're cheaper than Force.

I use a 50-34 up front, 11-28 out back. Anything over 10% grade is still a chore.

I don't think I've ever wished I had a 53 up front, and the only time I use the 34 chainring is on climbs so I don't know why I'd ever want to make that harder with a 39 (unless I somehow gained 200w of power).

+1

50/34 x 11/28 installed and ready for BA, hoping I don't need one more gear as that is it with my current set up!

interesting. I landed a crank with two sets of chainrings, so 52-36 is on there right now and that's pretty swell. I ordered a 11-28 for the back and it just arrived last night, so I think I'll stick it on and go find a hill.

50/34 with an 11-34 on the back. I plan to spin my way through the tough parts.

38/26 low gear gets me up everything I've come across so far, although climbing out of Barrett Junction heading east on Hwy 94 says a triple isn't such a bad idea. My randonneuse has a 46-34 with a 12-32 cassette. Perfect gearing for the long haul, plus a few on the low end "just in case".

34/28 gets me up almost anything in San Diego. I'm doing the Alpine Challenge this Saturday, so hopefully I won't eat my words. :)

One day I'll need something smaller than my 39-28, but I'm hoping that day is far, far away.

I use a 50-34 up front, 11-28 out back. Anything over 10% grade is still a chore.

I don't think I've ever wished I had a 53 up front, and the only time I use the 34 chainring is on climbs so I don't know why I'd ever want to make that harder with a 39 (unless I somehow gained 200w of power).

I thought that as well. I have a triple 52-39-30 and prior to Mulholland I was using a 12-25 in back. I swapped to the 11-28 for Mulholland. Now I love having that 52-11 combo. Coming down Highway 38 from Angelus Oaks last weekend, I didn't spin that gear out until I was close to 40mph. I think it actually helped my recovery to be able to spin my legs with some resistance on the downhills.

I was thinking of switching to a compact crank so that I could upgrade to Ultegra Di2, but now I'm thinking that giving up that 52-11 would be a bad thing.

I was thinking of switching to a compact crank so that I could upgrade to Ultegra Di2, but now I'm thinking that giving up that 52-11 would be a bad thing.go with a 52/36 compact as opposed to the more standard 50/34, almost as low as a 34 and you'll keep the 52 big ring

go with a 52/36 compact as opposed to the more standard 50/34, almost as low as a 34 and you'll keep the 52 big ring

But then my low goes from a 30x28 to 36x28. Besides, Di2 is limited to 16 tooth difference in front with a max 28 tooth in back according to the Di2 shop manual. More training can probably allow me to use a 34x28, but not the 36. No way I finish Mulholland this year without that 30x28. If the Ultegra Di2 system could handle an 11/28 in back with a 52/32 in front I'd be all over it. If they could just push the FD to 18t, I'd probably make the jump.

90% of my riding is done in hills and mountains, so I'll just stick with what I have until they make a triple compatible Di2 system.

But then my low goes from a 30x28 to 36x28. Besides, Di2 is limited to 16 tooth difference in front with a max 28 tooth in back according to the Di2 shop manual. More training can probably allow me to use a 34x28, but not the 36. No way I finish Mulholland this year without that 30x28. If the Ultegra Di2 system could handle an 11/28 in back with a 52/32 in front I'd be all over it. If they could just push the FD to 18t, I'd probably make the jump.

90% of my riding is done in hills and mountains, so I'll just stick with what I have until they make a triple compatible Di2 system.

I wouldn't hold my breath for a triple compatible Di2. Chances are equally good that Shimano will go the other way and start dropping triples from their mechanical groups too. They are already paving the way for that, by extending ranges of their RDs to 30T.

At best, we might see electronic versions of their mountain bike drivetrains some time soon, and those may or may not support triples. (And even then, the first groupset will be the electronic XTR, and it will cost way more than Ultegra Di2.)

Have you seen this? http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/12/bikes-and-tech/ask-nick/ask-nick-proof-that-running-an-11-32-on-ultegra-di2-is-possible_199407

Have you seen this? http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/12/bikes-and-tech/ask-nick/ask-nick-proof-that-running-an-11-32-on-ultegra-di2-is-possible_199407

That was very interesting...

(old)52x11=124gi
(new)50x11=119gi I think I could live with that because it's still better than 52x12(114gi).

(old)30x28=25gi
(new)34x32=28gi I'm not sure I would notice that difference.

Hmmm... might be getting some new components this fall.