Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-25-07, 12:24 PM   #1
powerglide
~ Going the Distance ~
Thread Starter
 
powerglide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Bikes: 2006 Bianchi Carbon 928, 2002 Gary Fisher Utopia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Cassette advice needed.

Actually posted over at road forum but was hoping input from mechs here...to make sure there aren't any issues I may have overlooked.

I need more lower gears for climbing (I'm a clyde yes)...running a short cage campy derailleur.
Official campy stance: medium cage needed for 13-29 (rather not do that) but some say they run it just fine...

I don't like the idea of losing that much tall gearing so leaning towards the IRD 12-28 (120 bucks) or the Miche 12-27 (60 bucks)

Anyone have experience with these cassettes? Any recomendations very welcome.

Thanks always!

powerglide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-07, 12:38 PM   #2
Evoracer
ThreadKiller
 
Evoracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Disneyland, Ca
Bikes:
Posts: 229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Your current rd will run the Campy 13-29 just fine. You'll have chain length issues to deal with probably. It seems cost is a factor in your descision. Miche makes individual cogs so you can mix and match. Pull the 13t or 14t from your current cassette and add a 27t to the backside with the appropriate spacer. About $7 plus shipping. It's worth a try to see if it is low enough for you before dropping the dough on a cassette.

2 cents out.
Evoracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-07, 12:46 PM   #3
San Rensho 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
What you are running now and what you want to change to is not appreciably different. You will be getting about 5 gear inches lower, which is likely to be unnoticeable.

Theres more of a jump in gear inches from a 52/13 to a 52/14 than what you will achieve by changing to another cassette.
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace

1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
San Rensho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-07, 03:16 PM   #4
powerglide
~ Going the Distance ~
Thread Starter
 
powerglide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Bikes: 2006 Bianchi Carbon 928, 2002 Gary Fisher Utopia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evoracer
Your current rd will run the Campy 13-29 just fine. You'll have chain length issues to deal with probably. It seems cost is a factor in your descision. Miche makes individual cogs so you can mix and match. Pull the 13t or 14t from your current cassette and add a 27t to the backside with the appropriate spacer. About $7 plus shipping. It's worth a try to see if it is low enough for you before dropping the dough on a cassette.

2 cents out.
Thank you Evoracer! Thats a good idea, I have a Campy Veloce casstte right now, can I break that down, remove the 13t and add a 27t or 28t to it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by San Rensho
What you are running now and what you want to change to is not appreciably different. You will be getting about 5 gear inches lower, which is likely to be unnoticeable.

Theres more of a jump in gear inches from a 52/13 to a 52/14 than what you will achieve by changing to another cassette.
Is it that unnoticeable? 5 gear inches sounds to me like a noticeable difference...especially since I can feel the less than 2 g.i. difference resulting from latest crank swap.
I lost you with this 52/13, 52/14...
powerglide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-07, 04:13 PM   #5
Evoracer
ThreadKiller
 
Evoracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Disneyland, Ca
Bikes:
Posts: 229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerglide
Thank you Evoracer! Thats a good idea, I have a Campy Veloce casstte right now, can I break that down, remove the 13t and add a 27t or 28t to it?
Yes you can change it out. Now, trying to find the cog you want may take a little effort. Jensonusa.com used to carry them, but appears they do no longer.
Evoracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 08:01 AM   #6
San Rensho 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerglide
Thank you Evoracer! Thats a good idea, I have a Campy Veloce casstte right now, can I break that down, remove the 13t and add a 27t or 28t to it?




Is it that unnoticeable? 5 gear inches sounds to me like a noticeable difference...especially since I can feel the less than 2 g.i. difference resulting from latest crank swap.
I lost you with this 52/13, 52/14...
To calculate gear inches, you divide the number of teeth on the chainring, by the number of teeth on the cog and multiply by 27 inches. Most people think, "Oh, I'm going from a 25 tooth cog all the way to a 29 tooth cog, so there must be a huge difference in gearing." Well, if you do the math, its about 6 gear inches difference which is not that much. Its less of a jump in gearing (do the math) than from a 52/13 to a 52/14.

If you can feel 2 gear inches, you are a better man than I.
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace

1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
San Rensho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 08:19 AM   #7
Al1943
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Bikes: Trek 5500, Colnago C-50
Posts: 9,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think 6 gear inches is a huge difference when it's the lowest gear on the bike and you're climbing a steep hill. And a difference of 2 gear inches does also makes a significant difference when climbing.
Al1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 08:33 AM   #8
HillRider 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!
Posts: 28,918
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
6 gear-inches is a large percentage change in the low gear range and should be a very noticable improvement. Going from a 25 to a 27T cog is an 8% reduction and 25 to 29T is a 16% improvement. 8% is noticable and 16% is really noticable.
HillRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 08:50 AM   #9
San Rensho 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillRider
6 gear-inches is a large percentage change in the low gear range and should be a very noticable improvement. Going from a 25 to a 27T cog is an 8% reduction and 25 to 29T is a 16% improvement. 8% is noticable and 16% is really noticable.
Why would 6 gear inches be any different in lower gears than it would in higher gears? 6 gear inches is 6 gear inches, no?
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace

1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
San Rensho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 09:14 AM   #10
HillRider 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!
Posts: 28,918
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 96 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Rensho
Why would 6 gear inches be any different in lower gears than it would in higher gears? 6 gear inches is 6 gear inches, no?
No, not really. What you "feel" on gear changes is the % reduction or increase, not the pure number.

Sort of like price changes. If a new car increases from $20,000 to $20,005 it's not the same impact as if a can of coffee increases from $10 to $15. Same $5 change but not perceived the same.
HillRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 11:01 AM   #11
powerglide
~ Going the Distance ~
Thread Starter
 
powerglide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Bikes: 2006 Bianchi Carbon 928, 2002 Gary Fisher Utopia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Rensho
To calculate gear inches, you divide the number of teeth on the chainring, by the number of teeth on the cog and multiply by 27 inches. Most people think, "Oh, I'm going from a 25 tooth cog all the way to a 29 tooth cog, so there must be a huge difference in gearing." Well, if you do the math, its about 6 gear inches difference which is not that much. Its less of a jump in gearing (do the math) than from a 52/13 to a 52/14.

If you can feel 2 gear inches, you are a better man than I.
What he vvv said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HillRider
No, not really. What you "feel" on gear changes is the % reduction or increase, not the pure number.

Sort of like price changes. If a new car increases from $20,000 to $20,005 it's not the same impact as if a can of coffee increases from $10 to $15. Same $5 change but not perceived the same.
My friends on the track are uber sensitive about gear ratios...gear inches was explained to me like this:
If my bike has a 6 gear inch difference compared to your bike, then our bikes will be 6 inches apart every revolution fo the crank. Consider track cyclists spinning at 150-180 rpms, races are won and lost by a gear inch or less...from what I understand.
powerglide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 11:04 AM   #12
operator
cab horn
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Bikes: 1987 Bianchi Campione
Posts: 28,306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerglide
My friends on the track are uber sensitive about gear ratios...gear inches was explained to me like this:
If my bike has a 6 gear inch difference compared to your bike, then our bikes will be 6 inches apart every revolution fo the crank. Consider track cyclists spinning at 150-180 rpms, races are won and lost by a gear inch or less...from what I understand.
No they are lost because the other guy put out more power than you did or used superior race tactics when it mattered. That being said. 2 gear inches is definitley noticeable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HillRider
No, not really. What you "feel" on gear changes is the % reduction or increase, not the pure number.
Sorry I disagree. 6 gear inches is 6 gear inches, anywhere you go. The reason why we talk in gear inches is that they are comparable.
operator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 11:07 AM   #13
powerglide
~ Going the Distance ~
Thread Starter
 
powerglide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Bikes: 2006 Bianchi Carbon 928, 2002 Gary Fisher Utopia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by operator
No they are lost because the other guy put out more power than you did or used superior race tactics when it mattered. That being said. 2 gear inches is definitley noticeable.
that too
powerglide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 11:11 AM   #14
San Rensho 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillRider
No, not really. What you "feel" on gear changes is the % reduction or increase, not the pure number.

Sort of like price changes. If a new car increases from $20,000 to $20,005 it's not the same impact as if a can of coffee increases from $10 to $15. Same $5 change but not perceived the same.

Ok, that makes sense, so from your post above, going from a 36/25-27 (8%) is about the same % change as going from a 52/13 -14, (7.7%) which is definitely noticeable, and from 36/25-29 is double that, or close to the difference between a 52/13 -15 (16%), which is a big difference in percieved gearing.

So is it safe to say that the rule of thumb in lower gears is that a 2 tooth difference is about the same as a one tooth difference in higher gears, in terms of how a cyclist perceives the change?
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace

1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
San Rensho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 12:08 PM   #15
55-11
Señor Cardgage Member
 
55-11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Bikes:
Posts: 348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Rensho
Ok, that makes sense, so from your post above, going from a 36/25-27 (8%) is about the same % change as going from a 52/13 -14, (7.7%) which is definitely noticeable, and from 36/25-29 is double that, or close to the difference between a 52/13 -15 (16%), which is a big difference in percieved gearing.

So is it safe to say that the rule of thumb in lower gears is that a 2 tooth difference is about the same as a one tooth difference in higher gears, in terms of how a cyclist perceives the change?
I think you're all missing the forest through the trees. Gear inches refers specifically, as stated previously, to distance traveled. At no point have I seen anyone account for effort (which is also not evident in converting to percentage change). If we apply the percentage change to any factor, it must be the distance traveled in one revolution at different gear ratios, which may APPEAR to be effort but clearly is not.

there ... I said it ...
55-11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 12:14 PM   #16
powerglide
~ Going the Distance ~
Thread Starter
 
powerglide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Bikes: 2006 Bianchi Carbon 928, 2002 Gary Fisher Utopia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 55-11
I think you're all missing the forest through the trees. Gear inches refers specifically, as stated previously, to distance traveled. At no point have I seen anyone account for effort (which is also not evident in converting to percentage change). If we apply the percentage change to any factor, it must be the distance traveled in one revolution at different gear ratios, which may APPEAR to be effort but clearly is not.

there ... I said it ...
Yup I hear you....that's why gear inches is not that main stream anymore I guess.
For instance, like I mentioned in the OP I changed my crank arm length from 172.5 to 175. So I'm laying down more torque hence it should feel easier climbing. This isn't reflected in GI charts, but if you use gain ratios, you get a picture of the effort. (old schoolers still prefer gi though)

powerglide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 12:19 PM   #17
Al1943
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Bikes: Trek 5500, Colnago C-50
Posts: 9,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerglide
My friends on the track are uber sensitive about gear ratios...gear inches was explained to me like this:
If my bike has a 6 gear inch difference compared to your bike, then our bikes will be 6 inches apart every revolution fo the crank.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 55-11
Gear inches refers specifically, as stated previously, to distance traveled.
It doesn't quite work that way. "Gear inches" are not the distance travelled for each crank rotation. Gear "development" is the distance travelled. For development you need to multiply gear inches by pi (3.1416). The gear inch number is only good for comparing gear combinations. If one rider has a 110 gear inches and another rider has 116 gear inches and they are riding at the same cadence then the rider with the 116 is going 18.9 inches farther with each rotation of the crank.
110 X 3.1416 = 345.5 inches
116 X 3.1416 = 364.4 inches

364.4 - 345.5 = 18.9 inches
Al1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 12:25 PM   #18
55-11
Señor Cardgage Member
 
55-11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Bikes:
Posts: 348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al1943
It doesn't quite work that way. "Gear inches" are not the distance travelled for each crank rotation. Gear "development" is the distance travelled. For development you need to multiply gear inches by pi (3.1416). The gear inch number is only good for comparing gear combinations. If one rider has a 110 gear inches and another rider has 116 gear inches and they are riding at the same cadence then the rider with the 116 is going 18.9 inches farther with each rotation of the crank.
110 X 3.1416 = 345.5 inches
116 X 3.1416 = 364.4 inches

364.4 - 345.5 = 18.9 inches
EXACTLY.... that's what I meant (y'know with all the other "important"information being assumed, but yeah, we're on the same page... eloquently spoken.
55-11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 12:46 PM   #19
Camilo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,149
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by San Rensho
Why would 6 gear inches be any different in lower gears than it would in higher gears? 6 gear inches is 6 gear inches, no?
A lot of good discussion after you asked this question, and it's been answered in various ways. I've enjoyed reading it.

To me, a simple rider with only high school physics (but college math!), small changes in the low (climbing) gears are more noticeable than similar changes in the high gears, whether they be in some absolute number such as gear inches or relative number like percentage change. Not only more noticeable, but more important.... for me anyway.

Why? Because I'm not only just a simple rider, I'm old and weak. To me, I really notice and appreciate any small difference that makes difficult hills more ridable within the "zone" of effort I try to maintain on normal, "base-building" rides. I don't notice the same small change on the other end, because I don't really care, or notice what it takes to go 40 MPH downhill or whether my top speed is 44 or 41 mph. The change from my 11-23 cassette to 12-26 was a very little change on either end, but it is noticeable and important on the low (30 front-26 rear) end and virtually invisible at the high (52-12) end.
Camilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 01:45 PM   #20
DMF 
Elitist Troglodyte
 
DMF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dallas
Bikes: 03 Raleigh Professional (steel)
Posts: 6,924
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
And you're going through all this why? Because you don't want to run a medium cage dérailleur. Would you care to tell us why not?
__________________
Stupidity got us into this mess - why can't it get us out?

- Will Rogers
DMF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 01:58 PM   #21
powerglide
~ Going the Distance ~
Thread Starter
 
powerglide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hermosa Beach, CA
Bikes: 2006 Bianchi Carbon 928, 2002 Gary Fisher Utopia
Posts: 1,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al1943
It doesn't quite work that way. "Gear inches" are not the distance travelled for each crank rotation. Gear "development" is the distance travelled. For development you need to multiply gear inches by pi (3.1416). The gear inch number is only good for comparing gear combinations. If one rider has a 110 gear inches and another rider has 116 gear inches and they are riding at the same cadence then the rider with the 116 is going 18.9 inches farther with each rotation of the crank.
110 X 3.1416 = 345.5 inches
116 X 3.1416 = 364.4 inches
364.4 - 345.5 = 18.9 inches
Oh yeah..the PI! Thank you for clarifying this for me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DMF
And you're going through all this why? Because you don't want to run a medium cage dérailleur. Would you care to tell us why not?
why should I go spend money on a rd if I don't need one
powerglide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 02:23 PM   #22
DMF 
Elitist Troglodyte
 
DMF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dallas
Bikes: 03 Raleigh Professional (steel)
Posts: 6,924
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
According to Campagnolo, you do need one.
__________________
Stupidity got us into this mess - why can't it get us out?

- Will Rogers
DMF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 03:12 PM   #23
Al1943
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oklahoma
Bikes: Trek 5500, Colnago C-50
Posts: 9,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerglide
why should I go spend money on a rd if I don't need one
On another forum I've heard people say that they have run a 13-29 with a short cage Campy RD and with a 53/39 ring set (plus evoracer above). You could always try it, just be careful. If we assume that the short cage RD can handle the size of the 29t then, as you know, the issues are chain wrap, and chain length. If your chain is at the normal ideal length and if you accidentally shift into the 39-13 combination the chain will probably go slack and you'll have chain on chain in the rear derailleur area, not good. If you shorten the chain and accidentally shift into the 53-29 the rear derailleur may reach its forward limit and destroy itself and possibly damage the frame. If the chain is long enough to handle the 53-29 and if you stay out of the small ring small cogs combinations you should be OK.
I guess you could try it very carefully on the workstand and then decide about a medium cage.
Personally I would buy the medium cage or go with a 50/36 Campy compact. I've got Record carbon 53/39, 13-26 and in the future may need to make the same expensive decision. That 26 isn't low enough for some of these 15% hills around here.
Al1943 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 03:30 PM   #24
operator
cab horn
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Bikes: 1987 Bianchi Campione
Posts: 28,306
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camilo
A lot of good discussion after you asked this question, and it's been answered in various ways. I've enjoyed reading it.

To me, a simple rider with only high school physics (but college math!), small changes in the low (climbing) gears are more noticeable than similar changes in the high gears, whether they be in some absolute number such as gear inches or relative number like percentage change. Not only more noticeable, but more important.... for me anyway.
And since when does noticeable make 6 gear inches not 6 gear inches. If I am wrong please enlighten me. The whole point in talking gear inches is that we don't need to say stuff like the following.

Quote:
So is it safe to say that the rule of thumb in lower gears is that a 2 tooth difference is about the same as a one tooth difference in higher gears, in terms of how a cyclist perceives the change?
If you want to compare gear inches to gear inches. Pretend you're on a fixed gear or single speed. and change out the cog or the front chainring to get whatever the heck gear inches you want. So long as the difference is 6.

I still don't see how you can claim, everything else on the bike being equal that, +6 gear inches at 30 gear inches total on the drivetrain is different than +6 gear inches at 60.
operator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-07, 03:35 PM   #25
bigbossman 
Dolce far niente
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northern CA
Bikes:
Posts: 10,777
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al1943
......Personally I would buy the medium cage or go with a 50/36 Campy compact. I've got Record carbon 53/39, 13-26 and in the future may need to make the same expensive decision. That 26 isn't low enough for some of these 15% hills around here.
Yeah - the compact with a 13/29 would make the most sense and difference in your case, if you're looking for more climbing gears.

Or, you could go whole hog and get a standard triple crank with the 13/29 cassette - but you'd also need a long cage RD.
__________________
"Love is not the dying moan of a distant violin, it’s the triumphant twang of a bedspring."

S. J. Perelman
bigbossman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:42 AM.