Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Commuting
Reload this Page >

Why 50-34 sucks for commuting

Search
Notices
Commuting Bicycle commuting is easier than you think, before you know it, you'll be hooked. Learn the tips, hints, equipment, safety requirements for safely riding your bike to work.

Why 50-34 sucks for commuting

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-23-16, 10:53 PM
  #101  
Senior Member
 
GovernorSilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington DC Metro Area
Posts: 1,218

Bikes: Breezer Uptown 8, Jamis Renegade Expert

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Darth Lefty
This is notionally a cyclocross setup and there is often one or two cranksets available but they are sometimes off-group. FC-RS500 (like Tiagra with 11-speed rings) comes in 46-36 and FC-6800 (Ultegra) comes in 48-36
Ah I see - I'd have to downgrade or upgrade my crankset just to make AndyK happy.

One advantage of being an inexperienced cyclist - I have very little idea how much my life will soon suck riding on a 50-34. I do know I'll probably never go up in chainring size as I don't race. It'll be interesting to see how much time I spend on the 50 vs. the 34 once I start commuting on the Jamis. The commute is spit roughly 50-50 between streets and MUPs. I don't trust our motorists here enough to try to blast away at 30+ mph except in limited sections of the commute. I saw a video in which a cyclist was cranking at high speed down a DC street and he suddenly collided with a car/truck whose driver decided to make a turn at exactly the wrong second. Got hurt really bad as I recall.

Last edited by GovernorSilver; 04-23-16 at 10:59 PM.
GovernorSilver is offline  
Old 04-24-16, 12:14 AM
  #102  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Andy_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 14,744

Bikes: Yes

Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3230 Post(s)
Liked 3,868 Times in 1,439 Posts
Originally Posted by GovernorSilver
Good to know.

I've been accident-prone enough that you never know when a future mishap will result in the destruction of a chainring, necessitating a replacement crankset. Is there a Shimano 105 version of a 46-34? I just see alternatives with more teeth, not less.
The CX50 was marketed as a 105-level crankset, but it's a 5-bolt crank, so the rings won't work with the new 105 cranks. There is an Ultegra (6800) crank available as 46-36, so you could buy that big ring if you have a 5800 series crank.
__________________
My Bikes
Andy_K is offline  
Old 04-24-16, 01:30 AM
  #103  
Mostly harmless ™
 
Bike Gremlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Novi Sad
Posts: 4,430

Bikes: Heavy, with friction shifters

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked 216 Times in 130 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
I can't see any "different set of advantages" that 1x and compact double cranks have for many outside of racing. If you know your course, a 1x system can be tuned to take the best advantage of it. But if you are just out riding and encountering very different terrains, the 1x systems fall flat on their face. Most of us don't ride a closed loop all the time and would do better with a multigear system with a wide range.

The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible?

Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway.
I prefer 3x systems to 1x. Now I'm looking for a 8 speed shifter that can work in friction mode. That way I can use 8 or 7 speed cassettes without problems (just add under 5 mm of spacers and shift to friction mode when using 7 speed). That way I can get cheaper, more robust drive system, with still a very wide gear range (for both hills and descends) and decently tightly spaced gearing.

For road cycling, I like regular doubles - no big jumps up front. But for commuting, triple is practically a double, with an extra gear for loaded/exhausted situations.
Bike Gremlin is offline  
Old 04-24-16, 08:02 AM
  #104  
Disco Infiltrator
 
Darth Lefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446

Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem

Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,103 Times in 1,367 Posts
So much melodrama!
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Darth Lefty is offline  
Old 04-24-16, 02:53 PM
  #105  
Senior Member
 
GovernorSilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington DC Metro Area
Posts: 1,218

Bikes: Breezer Uptown 8, Jamis Renegade Expert

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Is it all melodrama, really?

Or some disguised humor?

Last edited by GovernorSilver; 04-24-16 at 03:03 PM.
GovernorSilver is offline  
Old 04-24-16, 07:55 PM
  #106  
Senior Member
 
grolby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BOSTON BABY
Posts: 9,788
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 60 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
I can't see any "different set of advantages" that 1x and compact double cranks have for many outside of racing. If you know your course, a 1x system can be tuned to take the best advantage of it. But if you are just out riding and encountering very different terrains, the 1x systems fall flat on their face. Most of us don't ride a closed loop all the time and would do better with a multigear system with a wide range.

The customized system that I've presented aren't that difficult to put together nor are they that "ridiculous". They might require a little bit more work to put together then just using what comes out of the box but it's not that much effort and the results can be a lot better than the stock version. Do you always just take what is given to you? Never experiment to find out what is possible?

Frankly, when I see the shift pattern on compact doubles, I think it would take a continuing education course to figure out how to use them effectively. Most people would could grasp a cross-over system quite readily. Most people already shift their bikes that anyway.
Not having to deal with managing a set of three chainrings in addition to the rear cluster is an advantage no matter what the context. Historically, it's been strongly offset by the limitation in gear range, but that's mostly going away. It turns out that there's a point at which additional gear range isn't a strong advantage, and very few people aside from road racers care about having their gears all that closely spaced. Even road racers have the luxury of not caring so much about gear spacing anymore - I have an 11-28 11-speed cassette on my road bike, low enough to race up hills in the big cogs, yet still closely spaced enough in the smaller cogs to not need to change cassettes for flat crits.

I know you're going to give a long explanation of how this simplicity isn't an advantage, but of course it is. It's just offset by disadvantages that you've noted already for a lot of situations. As these drivetrains get better, the proportion of situations for which they aren't adequate will continue to shrink. Most of the people arguing for triples already get it, I see so many of them saying that they leave the chain on the middle ring for the large majority of the time. Commuter and city bikes with single-chainring derailleur drivetrains have been around for many decades. The concept obviously has appeal.

The effort to customize a gearing system might not be large in the grand scheme, but it's still a friction point and lots of people don't bother with it. I would argue that less need for customization is a benefit for triples, rather than citing more customization as a positive. You've got to go to the bike shop, or order parts online, calculate gear ratios... it's a pain in the ass. I find that stuff more fun than most people, cause I'm a nerd, but even I'd rather just ride my bike and be done with it.

As for compact doubles, I don't think I spent any time defending the typical 50-34 arrangement, which isn't great. It has its uses, but that big ring is still really big for a lot of people. Still, downsize the big ring a little bit to 48 or 46 and the whole thing starts to make a lot of sense. Shift pattern, whatever. I don't recognize the use of a shift pattern in my own riding, and I suspect very few people shift gears that way. The idea of a specific sequence of shifts to get acceptable spacing between gears made sense in the days of half-step gearing, when you had freewheels with a small number of cogs and low-capacity front derailleurs. These days, the wide range of modern cassettes means you just don't have to concern yourself with shifting in a particular order, and almost no one does. Use the big ring when you're going faster, the little ring when you're going slower, and make the fine adjustments on the cassette, done. That can be a little awkward when the gap between the chainrings is large, like on a 50-34, but that can be ameliorated a bit with the wide range cassettes modern drivetrains can handle.
grolby is offline  
Old 04-24-16, 08:03 PM
  #107  
Senior Member
 
grolby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BOSTON BABY
Posts: 9,788
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 60 Posts
Originally Posted by GeoKrpan
Racers don't use compact doubles. They are the nu-triple for the nu-freds.
Standard doubles are definitely more popular with racers, but this is demonstrably untrue. Plenty of racers out there with compacts. Or so I believe; I couldn't tell you for sure, cause here's the truth: racers, in general, just don't give a crap about what kind of crank you're running.

Originally Posted by Andy_K
You don't have to demand a triple. A 46-34 setup would be OK too.
Thumbs up for the 46 big ring. My commuter and cross bikes are 46-36 and 46-38 respectively (130 BCD crank on the cross bike). That's a nice size for a big ring!
grolby is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 10:31 AM
  #108  
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,355

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 152 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6215 Post(s)
Liked 4,213 Times in 2,362 Posts
Originally Posted by grolby
Not having to deal with managing a set of three chainrings in addition to the rear cluster is an advantage no matter what the context. Historically, it's been strongly offset by the limitation in gear range, but that's mostly going away. It turns out that there's a point at which additional gear range isn't a strong advantage, and very few people aside from road racers care about having their gears all that closely spaced. Even road racers have the luxury of not caring so much about gear spacing anymore - I have an 11-28 11-speed cassette on my road bike, low enough to race up hills in the big cogs, yet still closely spaced enough in the smaller cogs to not need to change cassettes for flat crits.
The kinds of gearing systems that I advocate aren't about closely spaced gears. If anything, I advocate exactly the opposite. I advocate that most people...i.e. the "average" rider...would benefit from having a much wider range of gearing that what is currently in vogue. 1x systems are all about closely spaced gears while sacrificing either the low end of the range or the high end of the range. Gears for the crank are chosen based on your anticipated needs in a 1x system and heaven help you if you happen to anticipate wrong.

For someone who doesn't race and/or may not be much more than a casual rider or even for commuters who may encounter hills while carrying more of a load than a racer does, triples and very wide gearing are the advantage


Originally Posted by grolby
I know you're going to give a long explanation of how this simplicity isn't an advantage, but of course it is. It's just offset by disadvantages that you've noted already for a lot of situations. As these drivetrains get better, the proportion of situations for which they aren't adequate will continue to shrink. Most of the people arguing for triples already get it, I see so many of them saying that they leave the chain on the middle ring for the large majority of the time. Commuter and city bikes with single-chainring derailleur drivetrains have been around for many decades. The concept obviously has appeal.
Simplicity is only an advantage if it makes life easier. Complexity is also an advantage if it also makes like easier. 1x systems may be great for a race course but they aren't for the wide ranging cyclist.

Originally Posted by grolby
The effort to customize a gearing system might not be large in the grand scheme, but it's still a friction point and lots of people don't bother with it. I would argue that less need for customization is a benefit for triples, rather than citing more customization as a positive. You've got to go to the bike shop, or order parts online, calculate gear ratios... it's a pain in the ass. I find that stuff more fun than most people, cause I'm a nerd, but even I'd rather just ride my bike and be done with it.
I agree that most people won't bother with customizing gearing but that is because most people don't understand gearing to begin with. Look at the way that bicycles were...and, to a certain extent, still are...market. People are impressed with more gears without understanding that "more gears" doesn't really mean what they think it means. Realistically, an increase in the number of cogs on the cassette doesn't really translate to the same number of gears times whatever the bike has in the front.

I wouldn't suggest customization if the manufacturers and component companies had any inkling of what gearing is to begin with.

Originally Posted by grolby
As for compact doubles, I don't think I spent any time defending the typical 50-34 arrangement, which isn't great. It has its uses, but that big ring is still really big for a lot of people. Still, downsize the big ring a little bit to 48 or 46 and the whole thing starts to make a lot of sense. Shift pattern, whatever. I don't recognize the use of a shift pattern in my own riding, and I suspect very few people shift gears that way. The idea of a specific sequence of shifts to get acceptable spacing between gears made sense in the days of half-step gearing, when you had freewheels with a small number of cogs and low-capacity front derailleurs. These days, the wide range of modern cassettes means you just don't have to concern yourself with shifting in a particular order, and almost no one does. Use the big ring when you're going faster, the little ring when you're going slower, and make the fine adjustments on the cassette, done. That can be a little awkward when the gap between the chainrings is large, like on a 50-34, but that can be ameliorated a bit with the wide range cassettes modern drivetrains can handle.
The 50-34 crank is a prime example of what I'm talking about. I've talked to a lot of people who don't feel that their bike is working properly because of the huge gap between the chainrings. They usually end up just staying in one ring and shifting until they hit the bottom of the cassette and avoid shifting on the front. Effectively, they have a 1x system but they really don't have to. I agree that dropping the large ring 2 to 4 teeth would make their lives easier...as would learning about how gearing works.

I disagree, however, that you don't have to worry about shifting in a particular order. Cadence and gearing are related. A wider cassette doesn't change the large gap between the two rings on the 50-34 compact. The step between the two rings is still large enough that it makes shifts awkward.

But the 50-34, like the 10, 11, 12 or flavor du jour of cassette and the "xx speed" bike, is about marketing, not good engineering. The bike companies tell you that the compact double offers the same range as a triple...which is almost does. But what they don't tell you is that it almost impossible to use it effectively. They trust that most people don't know diddly about gearing and will buy the "latest and greatest" because that what won the Tour...and if you ain't riding what "won the Tour" you aren't a real cyclist.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 11:36 AM
  #109  
Senior Member
 
alan s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 6,977
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1496 Post(s)
Liked 189 Times in 128 Posts
A 1x system that allows you to comfortably ride between 5 and 30 mph is just about right for most commuters (and most others). I'd be very surprised if 1x drivetrains don't take off in the next couple years and become standard. The MTBer who needs even lower gearing and the roadie who needs even higher gearing will become the outliers. Think about it. If the marketers can sell a 1x system over a 2x or 3x, and still charge the customer the same, they'll do it in a heartbeat. I can see chainrings in the 38 range and 12-speed cassettes with 10-50 becoming standard for road setups. That's a 500% gear range. FDs and multi-chainring cranks will quickly fall by the wayside.
alan s is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 11:52 AM
  #110  
Senior Member
 
caloso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865

Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur

Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times in 1,417 Posts
I am perfectly satisfied with my old-school 53-39. It's flat here, and I don't carry much, but I can't see ever needing anything lower than 39x27.
caloso is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 11:54 AM
  #111  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Andy_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 14,744

Bikes: Yes

Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3230 Post(s)
Liked 3,868 Times in 1,439 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
They trust that most people don't know diddly about gearing and will buy the "latest and greatest" because that what won the Tour...and if you ain't riding what "won the Tour" you aren't a real cyclist.
Is my '84 Pinarello close enough? I can put oval chainrings on it if necessary. I can probably even find someone to make a Dogma decal for me (assuming the '88 win is expired for purposes of making me a real cyclist).
__________________
My Bikes
Andy_K is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 11:58 AM
  #112  
Senior Member
 
alan s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 6,977
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1496 Post(s)
Liked 189 Times in 128 Posts
Originally Posted by caloso
I am perfectly satisfied with my old-school 53-39. It's flat here, and I don't carry much, but I can't see ever needing anything lower than 39x27.
When I'm riding in Florida on my road bike, 53-39, 12-21 is perfect. I do that about one week a year. The rest of the time, I prefer a wider gear range due to the hillier terrain.
alan s is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 11:58 AM
  #113  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Andy_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 14,744

Bikes: Yes

Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3230 Post(s)
Liked 3,868 Times in 1,439 Posts
Originally Posted by alan s
A 1x system that allows you to comfortably ride between 5 and 30 mph is just about right for most commuters (and most others). I'd be very surprised if 1x drivetrains don't take off in the next couple years and become standard. The MTBer who needs even lower gearing and the roadie who needs even higher gearing will become the outliers. Think about it. If the marketers can sell a 1x system over a 2x or 3x, and still charge the customer the same, they'll do it in a heartbeat. I can see chainrings in the 38 range and 12-speed cassettes with 10-50 becoming standard for road setups. That's a 500% gear range. FDs and multi-chainring cranks will quickly fall by the wayside.
I've got an 11-36 cassette and a clutch-type MTB derailleur on a shelf in the garage (both of which I bought just because I found them cheap and thought I might have a use for them some day). This discussion has inspired me to build something up to see how I like it. I think it will be pretty good for commuting.
__________________
My Bikes
Andy_K is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 12:06 PM
  #114  
Senior Member
 
alan s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 6,977
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1496 Post(s)
Liked 189 Times in 128 Posts
Originally Posted by Andy_K
I've got an 11-36 cassette and a clutch-type MTB derailleur on a shelf in the garage (both of which I bought just because I found them cheap and thought I might have a use for them some day). This discussion has inspired me to build something up to see how I like it. I think it will be pretty good for commuting.
Sounds good. Start a 1x pics thread when you get it built up and I'll add mine.
alan s is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 12:13 PM
  #115  
Senior Member
 
caloso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865

Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur

Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times in 1,417 Posts
Originally Posted by alan s
When I'm riding in Florida on my road bike, 53-39, 12-21 is perfect. I do that about one week a year. The rest of the time, I prefer a wider gear range due to the hillier terrain.
Do you ride near the Mall? I was surprised how steep Capitol Hill is. (Independence near the Rayburn)
caloso is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 12:20 PM
  #116  
Senior Member
 
alan s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 6,977
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1496 Post(s)
Liked 189 Times in 128 Posts
Originally Posted by caloso
Do you ride near the Mall? I was surprised how steep Capitol Hill is. (Independence near the Rayburn)
I have, but not not very often. So much security around there now, but they don't stop bikes, which is kind of cool. Most of my riding, at least commuting, is along the Potomac River valley, which is fairly flat, but there are some decent hills in Northern VA and Maryland as you ride away from the river.
alan s is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 01:22 PM
  #117  
Senior Member
 
GovernorSilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington DC Metro Area
Posts: 1,218

Bikes: Breezer Uptown 8, Jamis Renegade Expert

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by caloso
Do you ride near the Mall? I was surprised how steep Capitol Hill is. (Independence near the Rayburn)
My regular commute route includes a climb up Louisiana from the Mall towards Union Station - this street goes past the US Capitol. I don't think the climb is that bad, but I do get a workout. I'm usually spinning on my 6th speed (out of 8 on my Nexus 8 IGH) - 7th when I'm feeling strong, 5th when I'm feeling weaker (usually the days with the worst combination of heat and humidity). The Uptown 8 has a 38T chainring.

The most challenging climb I've attempted in DC so far is 15th St. northbound, after crossing Florida Ave, but that was while I was test riding a road bike (Felt V85). I've no doubt the climb would have been more difficult on the Uptown 8.

I have yet to commute on my Renegade. Hope to do so within 2 weeks.
GovernorSilver is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 01:38 PM
  #118  
Mostly harmless ™
 
Bike Gremlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Novi Sad
Posts: 4,430

Bikes: Heavy, with friction shifters

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1107 Post(s)
Liked 216 Times in 130 Posts
If there were widely available and cheap cassettes starting with 14t, I'd be happy with a 53-39. However, with cassettes starting at 11, or 12, I have no use of big ring being over 50t. Also, I find that on flats, around 46 is the sweet spot - gives me minimal cross chaining and is good when riding both fast and slow. When I come to a stop, just make one shift up front, to the middle ring. So a triple is an ideal crankset for my riding - which includes both fast riding, and slow, loaded tired up hills. 46-36-24 would be perfect for my taste for 28" wheels, while on 26" MTB I prefer 48-38-28 (mostly urban, paved riding).
Bike Gremlin is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 01:46 PM
  #119  
Disco Infiltrator
 
Darth Lefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446

Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem

Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,103 Times in 1,367 Posts
An extreme example from another subforum. 53-34 on a tandem:

https://www.bikeforums.net/tandem-cyc...m-luddite.html
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Darth Lefty is offline  
Old 04-25-16, 01:58 PM
  #120  
Senior Member
 
caloso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865

Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur

Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times in 1,417 Posts
Originally Posted by Slaninar
If there were widely available and cheap cassettes starting with 14t, I'd be happy with a 53-39. However, with cassettes starting at 11, or 12, I have no use of big ring being over 50t. Also, I find that on flats, around 46 is the sweet spot - gives me minimal cross chaining and is good when riding both fast and slow. When I come to a stop, just make one shift up front, to the middle ring. So a triple is an ideal crankset for my riding - which includes both fast riding, and slow, loaded tired up hills. 46-36-24 would be perfect for my taste for 28" wheels, while on 26" MTB I prefer 48-38-28 (mostly urban, paved riding).

When you mentioned 14t cassettes it reminded me of setting up my son's race bike. Juniors are limited to a maximum gear development of 7.9m or 26". With 23mm tires on 700c (622) wheels, you can do this with a 52x14 or 45x12. Since 12-25 cassettes are so much cheaper and easier to find than 14-25, it just made sense to go with a 45t big ring. (It also makes it possible for us to swap wheels, which is a nice benefit.)

I found this TA chainring on Wiggle and it's worked flawlessly with a Tiagra FD.
caloso is offline  
Old 04-26-16, 05:38 PM
  #121  
Disco Infiltrator
 
Darth Lefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446

Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem

Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,103 Times in 1,367 Posts
Sauce for the goose: someone posting about weight loss in the MTB subforum today made me do the math. You can save about 11 oz with the XT single vs the XT triple... depending on your choices. But the range is definitely reduced. Do you need that bottom or that top?

[TABLE="width: 513"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]triple[/TD]
[TD]single[/TD]
[TD]note[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]left shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]listed "230g/pair"[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]right shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD weight[/TD]
[TD]151[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]high clamp band[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD cable weight[/TD]
[TD]neglected[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]crankset weight[/TD]
[TD]774[/TD]
[TD]694[/TD]
[TD]32 for single, 30 and 34 available[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]RD weight[/TD]
[TD]275[/TD]
[TD]271[/TD]
[TD]sgs for triple, gs for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cassette weight[/TD]
[TD]411[/TD]
[TD]450[/TD]
[TD]11-40 for triple, 11-46 for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]weight difference[/TD]
[TD]1841[/TD]
[TD]1530[/TD]
[TD]311 difference - 11 oz[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ratio[/TD]
[TD]3.64[/TD]
[TD]2.91[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ratio[/TD]
[TD]0.55[/TD]
[TD]0.70[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]total range[/TD]
[TD]6.61[/TD]
[TD]4.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]105.45[/TD]
[TD]84.36[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]15.95[/TD]
[TD]20.17[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Darth Lefty is offline  
Old 04-26-16, 06:45 PM
  #122  
Senior Member
 
trailangel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 4,848

Bikes: Schwinn Varsity

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1931 Post(s)
Liked 742 Times in 422 Posts
Originally Posted by MRT2
Some ask about giving up top end speed, but realistically, how many people can really use a big gear of 121 gear inches on a commuter?
Lots of guys don't want to admit they can never use 120 inch, or even 111 inch gear. You are talking about their manhood now.... be careful.
trailangel is offline  
Old 04-26-16, 07:26 PM
  #123  
Senior Member
 
alan s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 6,977
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1496 Post(s)
Liked 189 Times in 128 Posts
Originally Posted by Darth Lefty
Sauce for the goose: someone posting about weight loss in the MTB subforum today made me do the math. You can save about 11 oz with the XT single vs the XT triple... depending on your choices. But the range is definitely reduced. Do you need that bottom or that top?

[TABLE="width: 513"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]triple[/TD]
[TD]single[/TD]
[TD]note[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]left shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]listed "230g/pair"[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]right shifter weight[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD]115[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD weight[/TD]
[TD]151[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD]high clamp band[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]FD cable weight[/TD]
[TD]neglected[/TD]
[TD]n/a[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]crankset weight[/TD]
[TD]774[/TD]
[TD]694[/TD]
[TD]32 for single, 30 and 34 available[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]RD weight[/TD]
[TD]275[/TD]
[TD]271[/TD]
[TD]sgs for triple, gs for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]cassette weight[/TD]
[TD]411[/TD]
[TD]450[/TD]
[TD]11-40 for triple, 11-46 for single[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]weight difference[/TD]
[TD]1841[/TD]
[TD]1530[/TD]
[TD]311 difference - 11 oz[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ring teeth[/TD]
[TD]22[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom cog teeth[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top ratio[/TD]
[TD]3.64[/TD]
[TD]2.91[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom ratio[/TD]
[TD]0.55[/TD]
[TD]0.70[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]total range[/TD]
[TD]6.61[/TD]
[TD]4.18[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]top gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]105.45[/TD]
[TD]84.36[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]bottom gear inches 29er[/TD]
[TD]15.95[/TD]
[TD]20.17[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
While those numbers may be correct, not sure why the front shifter cable and full length housing is not counted. Also, the chain would probably be 6-8 links shorter. Hard to believe the difference between a triple and single crank would be so small, but I guess someone weighed the stuff.
alan s is offline  
Old 04-26-16, 08:32 PM
  #124  
Disco Infiltrator
 
Darth Lefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,446

Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Tilt, Samba tandem

Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3126 Post(s)
Liked 2,103 Times in 1,367 Posts
Originally Posted by alan s
While those numbers may be correct, not sure why the front shifter cable and full length housing is not counted.
Got the numbers from Shimano site, couldn't find a weight for the cable. The single has a NW ring that's going to be pretty beefy.
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Darth Lefty is offline  
Old 04-26-16, 08:45 PM
  #125  
Senior Member
 
PatrickGSR94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Memphis TN area
Posts: 7,391

Bikes: 2011 Felt Z85 (road/commuter), 2006 Marin Pine Mountain (utility/commuter E-bike), 1995 KHS Alite 1000 (gravel grinder)

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 676 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
I use a compact double and 10sp 11-28 on my commuter road bike, just because that's what it came with. Gearing seems fine for me. In my hilly area I make use of the entire gear range from 34-28 all the way up to 50-11.

Mostly, though, I stay in the 3rd-7th cogs most of the time. I usually start from a stop in the small ring and 5th cog from lowest. I usually switch between the small and big rings while on the 5th or 6th cog. Sometimes if the large ring and 5th cog gets too hard, I'll switch to the little ring and 6th cog, and can usually maintain about the same speed as before, but at a higher cadence.

I'm sure I don't have the best shifting and cadence technique, but it seems to work for me. My other 2 bikes are both 3x8, and honestly I prefer having only 2 rings up front. I'd probably like 1x if I could go to a 11sp cassette and just eliminate front shifting altogether.
PatrickGSR94 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.