Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37
  1. #1
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Gears, easier climbs, gear math

    I want to understand gears better. Anybody want to help?

    Current bike has 38T crank, and 7 gears in back, ranging from 13-34T. Considering a bike with three gears in front, 28/38/48T, and the back is 8 gears, 11-34T.

    I know that the tires and geometry will make a difference, but what I'm after now is to understand the math here. Clearly, I have approximately the same gear range on the old bike as on the new one in second. But I'd like to be able to understand it in more detail.

    How can I tell what specific set of gears will match another specific set? Anybody know a formula?

    Angela
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  3. #3
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Been studying that... it took me a while to make any sense of it. But I think I have gear inches figured out:

    Diameter * (front TPI) / (rearTPI)

    A lower number here is "easier" pedaling, or more climbing. Is that right?
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That' right. The lower the number of gear inches, the "easier" the gear is to pedal.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Reston, VA
    My Bikes
    2003 Giant OCR2
    Posts
    2,369
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by angelaharms View Post
    Been studying that... it took me a while to make any sense of it. But I think I have gear inches figured out:

    Diameter * (front TPI) / (rearTPI)

    A lower number here is "easier" pedaling, or more climbing. Is that right?
    Yep. But it doesn't take the cranks into account. Sheldon's best metric is "gain ratio", which divides what you have above by the length of the crank. This has some more useful benefits, including:

    *gets rid of effects due to varying crank lengths
    *makes the result an actual ratio
    *is very conceptual - the result ends up being the distance traveled by your wheel divided by the distance traveled by your foot.

    So if a certain gear combination has a gain ratio of 5, that means that the wheel travels 5 times as much distance as your foot. This number can be compared between any two bikes.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    My 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
    25,260
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Right, lower is slower and easier. The formula is

    Gear inches = (Wheel Diameter)*Chainring teeth/cog teeth

    For you case in the 38T chainring and 34T cog with a 700c or 27" wheel the gear inch would be:

    GI = 27*38/34 = 30.2 gear-inches

    For 700c or 27" wheels, the diameter is usually assumed to be 27" which is pertty close for most tire sizes. For MTB wheels the diameter is taken as 26".

    Use the same calculation for each combination of chairring and cog.

    BTW, Sheldon Brown's web site has a calcualtor for the gear table for any cassette/chainring set-up. Look here: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/

  7. #7
    free mallocs
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    melbourne, australia
    Posts
    520
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/touring/gears.htm -- Another big long article about gears. This one is less about the basics than it is about the geekery though.

  8. #8
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I couldn't figure out what the results meant, when I tried Sheldon's calculator. It was a list of percentages. Sorry to be such a n00b.
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

  9. #9
    Senior Member Bill Kapaun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun
    My Bikes
    86 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds.
    Posts
    6,759
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Gear Inches are based on the old high wheel bikes A 60" diameter wheel was 60 GI. It was "direct drive", meaning every rotation of the crank was one rotation of the wheel,
    With chain rings and cogs, you have gear multiplication/division.
    A 48T ring driving a 24T cog means you get 2 rotations of the wheel for every rotation of the crank, or with the 60" wheel, you would have 120 GI.
    A 48T ring & 24T cog will have EXACTLY the same GI as a 38T ring and a 19T cog or a 28T ring and a 14T cog. ALL are 2:1, and thus 120 GI with our 60" wheel. A 48:16 would be 3:1 or 180 GI.
    It's just simple arithmetic, really.
    Ring teeth/ cog teeth X tire diameter.
    Last edited by Bill Kapaun; 08-25-08 at 05:55 PM.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    58
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by angelaharms View Post
    I couldn't figure out what the results meant, when I tried Sheldon's calculator. It was a list of percentages. Sorry to be such a n00b.
    The percentages between the gears are just the amount of change between one gear and the next at that end of the bike. The percentages are only between the numbers along the top or along the leftmost column (the yellow boxes, the gears themselves).

    The numbers in the white boxes are either the gain ratios or the gear inches, depending on which option you set on the first page.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Road Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    My Bikes
    Terraferma 650b, Mondonico SL and ELOS, Masi Gran Criterium, Trek 610, Breezer Liberty, Georgena Terry Classic
    Posts
    10,978
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by angelaharms View Post
    I want to understand gears better. Anybody want to help?

    Current bike has 38T crank, and 7 gears in back, ranging from 13-34T. Considering a bike with three gears in front, 28/38/48T, and the back is 8 gears, 11-34T.

    I know that the tires and geometry will make a difference, but what I'm after now is to understand the math here. Clearly, I have approximately the same gear range on the old bike as on the new one in second. But I'd like to be able to understand it in more detail.

    How can I tell what specific set of gears will match another specific set? Anybody know a formula?

    Angela
    There are many interpretations of gearing, but I think gear inches is as useful as any. Bill gave you a great 5-minute lesson. In setting up the gearing for a particular bike, the first questions are, how high and how low do I need? Your bike under consideration will go as low as almost any bike and similarly as high, so you shouldn't need any easier or harder gears.

    Road Fan

  12. #12
    rebmeM roineS JanMM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    My Bikes
    RANS V3, RANS V-Rex, RANS Screamer
    Posts
    11,422
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Most folks never consider the actual math involved but, rather, just look at the charts or calculators that give you the gear inches for the various combinations of cogs, chainrings and wheel sizes.

  13. #13
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    So how does 29.1 gear inches compare with 22.5? The old bike goes down to 29.1, and I am hoping I'll be a little stronger on hills on the new one, which goes down to 22.6 (27*28/34). Is that a significant difference, do you think?

    I honestly couldn't tell subjectively, when I tested the bike. I was pretty tired from testing all of them. (On the other hand, I did climb up a particular bridge three times in one day.)

    Anyway, I'm a bit of a crip. If it's possible to customize to get better climbing, it might be worth doing.
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

  14. #14
    Keep on climbing
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Marlborough, Massachusetts
    My Bikes
    2004 Calfee Tetra Pro
    Posts
    2,068
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by angelaharms View Post
    So how does 29.1 gear inches compare with 22.5? The old bike goes down to 29.1, and I am hoping I'll be a little stronger on hills on the new one, which goes down to 22.6 (27*28/34). Is that a significant difference, do you think?
    29.1 to 22.5 is a big drop in gearing.
    "There is more to life than increasing its speed" -- Mahatma Gandhi

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Oklahoma
    My Bikes
    Trek 5500, Colnago C-50
    Posts
    9,018
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    22.5 is really low. You should be able to climb a tree with that.

    Al

  16. #16
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's terrific news. Thanks, guys. I'm heavy and also have muscle issues, so I doubt I'll climb a tree, but maybe overpasses will be easier, and occasional hills will be *possible*
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

  17. #17
    Senior Member Bill Kapaun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun
    My Bikes
    86 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds.
    Posts
    6,759
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I see you're just about 40 miles down the road from me!
    You always want 1 ger lower than you think you need.
    IF you could "almost" manage with 29 GI, just a couple less will make a significant difference.
    There are other factors involved also. A longer crank arm gives you more leverage, thus you can get by with a slightly greater GI, or the opposite with a shorter arm.
    Bike weight. More weight going uphill requires lower GI.

    On your current bike, do you have the tires aired up to the max pressure printed on the sidewall?
    Are they knobbies? SMOOTH street type tires weigh less and roll easier.
    Is your seat adjusted properly? A little too low and you don't develop all the power from your stroke. See-
    http://bikenhike.com/page.cfm?pageid=23&FAQid=25

  18. #18
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    40 miles... Corvallis? I have tweaked my current bike, except for replacing the very fat (2.125) 26" street tires with only slightly fat ones (1.75). Potential bike has thinner tires, 700c. When I rode the potential bike, it seemed like it was just as hard to get up the test hill as with my old bike, but that might have been just me. I definitely needed to go down to 1-1, though.

    Old bike is crank-forward though. It might also just have to do with getting used to it.

    I'ma go ride the new one again this morning.
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

  19. #19
    dit
    dit is offline
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Middle TN
    My Bikes
    custom built 531 db sport touring frame
    Posts
    602
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There are folks out there running gears down around 17-19 gi. Sometimes it is just easier to walk up the hill but it sure hurts the ego.

  20. #20
    Senior Member DannoXYZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Saratoga, CA
    Posts
    11,495
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There's another website somewhere that gives a final number of "development" for gearing. That's the distance the bike travels per turn of the crank. Much easier to understand.

    To answer Angela's original question, NO, the lowest gearing on those two bikes are not the same:

    current bike - MTB
    38f/34r = 1.118 gear-ratio * (26in*3.14/12in/ft) wheel-circumference = 7.60 ft per crank-revolution

    new bike - road
    28f/34r = 0.824 gear-ratio * (27in*3.14/12in/ft) = 5.82 ft per crank-revolution

    The new bike will be MUCH easier to pedal up hills in its lowest gear compared to the current one. But you have to get into the 28t granny-ring instead of staying in the middle 38t chainring.
    Last edited by DannoXYZ; 08-26-08 at 12:49 PM.

  21. #21
    Senior Member Bill Kapaun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun
    My Bikes
    86 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds.
    Posts
    6,759
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "When I rode the potential bike, it seemed like it was just as hard to get up the test hill as with my old bike, but that might have been just me."

    Did you verify the shift to the granny ring? Maybe it didn't shift? You should be able to nearly climb a wall with 28-34! Was the seat set at the right height? Too low and you can't develop 100% of your thrust.

    What bike are you getting?

    I'm on I-5 and it starts with Alban

  22. #22
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Today I bought a Raleigh Detour 3.5, 24 speed, girly-girl frame. Here's Raleigh's pic. (Mine has the seat up and the handlebars down.)



    I'll try it on some hills (bridges & overpasses, really) and get back to you about the easyness. Thanks to everybody for the help figuring out gears.

    Angela
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

  23. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    27
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Al1943 View Post
    22.5 is really low. You should be able to climb a tree with that.

    Al
    Agreed. It's too late for the math but my new LHT bottom end is 26t front 34t rear and I think I could climb straight up the wall of our house.

    James
    http://onelessindenver.blogspot.com

  24. #24
    Low car diet JiveTurkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Corvallis, OR, USA
    My Bikes
    2006 Windsor Dover w/105, 2007 GT Avalanche w/XT, 1995 Trek 820 setup for touring, 201? Yeah single-speed folder, 199? Huffy tandem.
    Posts
    2,372
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The most intuitive output on the gear-calculator to me is MPH/KPH per given RPM; it's much easier for me to compare gears.
    Quote Originally Posted by slopvehicle View Post
    Not wearing a helmet makes me more aware of my surroundings. I find myself anticipating the hardness of concrete 50 or 100 feet in front of me, it's almost a zen-like connection between my face and the pavement.

  25. #25
    Spark of the Divine Fire
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Eugene, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesd416 View Post
    Agreed. It's too late for the math but my new LHT bottom end is 26t front 34t rear and I think I could climb straight up the wall of our house.

    James
    http://onelessindenver.blogspot.com
    This is helping me, for sure. I just rode the new one more, and I know I ain't climbin' up no walls. What it's helping me with is getting a sort-of concrete way of comparing my ability with "normal" ability. I am generally too hard on myself. Like I think most people are in real pain doing normal things, but they don't mind, and I'm somehow just too weak to buck up and do it. But this sort of feedback helps me understand that I really do have a different experience, and maybe I should cut myself some slack!

    Anyway, sorry to get so personal. Thanks again, and stuff. I'm enjoying experimenting with my new improved climbing ability.

    Angela
    Rides: 2008 Raleigh Detour 4.5 (Ivy) and 2006 Trek Sole Ride 100 (Lurch)
    Wife to: 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (22")
    Mom to: 2006 Trek 7200 (25"!), 2008 Raleigh Venture 3.0 (22"), 2007 Raleigh Mohave 2.0 (16"), and a little tiny Allycat Shadow trail-a-bike & PV Glider balance bike :)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •