rydabent

On another forum there is a picture of a 13 speed cluster by Phil Wood. It may be just an advertising joke or tool. But-----------my question is----------just how many gears do we really need in the rear cluster? What magic number is nothing more than needless complication and over kill?

Bandera

Proper gearing isn't about the # of cogs but the Range(s) required.
Having the Low necessary to climb the steepest hill in the area without undue stress and the High that one is willing to spin out on the other side defines the Ranges.
Cram as many cogs in between as budget allows for efficiency and proceed.
That's the technical history of road cycling as 1 became 3,5,6,7,10,11 and on......

-Bandera

bconneraz

is it for a 1x13 set up? If so, adding more cogs is actually simplifying; no need for additional chain rings, a front der, or a front shifter. I saw a pic yesterday, but haven't taken the time to read up; sounds like I better go surf the interwebs.

fietsbob

the 14 speed IGH works very well .. dual range, 3, 3speeds.. 1 cog.

DiabloScott

When the standard went from 5v to 6v freewheels, nobody complained. You had to spread your stays a little but it was easy.

From 6v to 7v was still the same spacing but indexed (downtube) shifting came at about the same time and it was virtually universally well-received. A few traditionalists laughed at the morons who couldn't master friction shifters.

From 7v to 8v now required a new bike because the spacing went to 130mm and people started guffawing at how ridiculous the quest for more cogs was getting to be... but it also came with BRIFTERS and that was pretty damned cool... and freehubs with cassettes instead of freewheels was definitely an improvement. So now if you wanted 8v brake lever shifting you pretty much needed a whole new bike... big VELO was unfairly tempting us with innovation that required us to upgrade and spend.

From 8-9; 9-10, 10-11 et seq there really haven't been any quantum improvements in shifting - yeah the groups are getting better but they're just adding gears because they can (and because the other companies are doing it so they have to) - there's not nearly as much motivation to upgrade a 10v group to an 11v group but they really don't have much else to market.

trailangel

It's enough already. Make it stop.. I can't remember what gear I'm in.....

Shimagnolo

<TIM_ALLEN_VOICE> Ooh! Ooh!! Ooh!! Argh! Argh!! Argh!!! </TIM_ALLEN_VOICE>

Bandera

None for me.
Since I don't do down-mountain time trials the mid-wide range Shimano 11 cog cassettes default to an 11T top cog is an answer to a question I'm not asking.
That being said having come up w/ close ratios it's great to run a 12-25 or 12-27 ten cog on my terrain, very efficient.

-Bandera

Flying Merkel

Grant Peterson sayeth that 8 is sufficient.

Bill Kapaun

9 speed is my "sweet spot" considering cost/durability for cogs & chain.

dabac

I'm perfectly happy with 3x7 on my commuter, close ratio. That stuff lasts for ages with minimal turning and upkeep.
And I like the 3x9 on my singletrack MTB.
Could probably do 2x9 compact and be content on a road bike.

cny-bikeman

An 8 speed 13-28 cassette is as much as I think I will ever need or want. The jumps on that cassette are the same as what I used to get on a 5 speed 14/21 racing freewheel, and a great match for my favored 24/38/48 crankset. I can't see any great utility in closer percentage jumps, don't need a lower gear nor a higher one. I would hope I am never forced to go beyond a 9 speed rear if 8 speed becomes hard to find, as 10 and beyond in my opinion neither wear nor work as well.

Reynolds 

For my kind of riding, on flat roads, 5sp 14-19 and 42-52 would be more than enough. For hilly terrain, 8sp 12-28 and 26-36-48.

Bill Kapaun

I can for my use.
I run 12-23 or 13-25 9 speeds and my terrain is pretty flat.
Having emphysema, I find I do best spinning a very narrow cadence range. Being able to shift up/down 1T at a time as the wind or slope changes is VERY useful for me.

davidad

shimano has a patent for a 14 sp cassette with a chain that looks like the late 1800's. The inner plates arc over the cog teeth to get clearance.
I think it was at least 6 or more years ago.

Bandera

Sign me up for a: 12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,23,25,27,29

GeorgeBMac

My 3x7 works just fine.
My 3x9 works even better
My 3x10 works -- but too often I can't really tell if the thing actually shifted or not. Plus, it gets about half the chain life as my 3x9.

9 speed seems to be my sweet spot. Plus as others have mentioned, I need range not just more middle gears.

LastKraftWagen

I want 20+ cogs with 10, 10.25, 10.5, 10.75, 11, 11.33, 11.66, 12... teethI also want uphills to be as fast as downhills, an app that always gives me a tailwind, and a helmet full of cheese!

Reynolds 

^ Did you hear about the ShelBroCo Nanodrive?

HillRider

It was way more than 6 years ago, the patents date from the late 1990's. The patents are: US 5,954,604 for the 14-speed cassette and US 5,921,881 for the corresponding chain.

davidad

Thanks. I couldn't remember how long ago I had seen it.

davidad

Get a shimano Capreo hub and you can get a 9t cog. Capreo

LesterOfPuppets

Yes, 1x13 on a fatbike.

They're taking it to Interbike.

loimpact

Ya, I wanna know where it ends myself. I was just looking at a display for a Specialized Stumpjumper where they show "Then - 1981" and "Now - 2015" and you see the itty-bitty front chainring w/ 11 speeds on the back. Ok, great I get it for a single chainring setup. However......road bikes are probably always gonna want a little more so I won't put it past them to add more.

My problem is.......11 speeds chains right now are $30 at the VERY CHEAPEST!!!!!

What the heck will a 13 speed chain cost**********?

xenologer

It'll cost even less, since the manufacturing technology is identical to prior chains, and being narrower saves money on materials.