Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Fifty Plus (50+)
Reload this Page >

Standard vs. Compact crank set

Notices
Fifty Plus (50+) Share the victories, challenges, successes and special concerns of bicyclists 50 and older. Especially useful for those entering or reentering bicycling.

Standard vs. Compact crank set

Old 08-31-12, 01:13 PM
  #26  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Uncertain
Posts: 8,651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by bruce19
53x13......26.5 mph@83 rpm
53x14......27 mph@90 rpm
53x15......27 mph@98 rpm

My take away from this is that I probably don't need the 53x12 and 53x13. Maybe I don't even need the 53x14 for the riding I do. Just wondering if anyone has any insights or opinions about this.
I don't know about insights, but as usual I have plenty of opinions.

First of all, you say this road was close to flat. So the downhill gradient was only very shallow. In which case I am not at all surprised that you found the 53x14 or 15 the most suitable gears. I wouldn't expect to be in my highest gears in those circumstances unless I was flat-out sprinting.

But I don't think that justifies the conclusion that you don't need the 53x12. Or, to be more precise, you may not need it but that doesn't mean it isn't worth having. You'll go down steeper slopes than this, and on those it may be useful. In particular, you mentioned an interest in time-trialling. Were you to pursue that interest, you'd definitely want a gear that would allow you to continue putting a lot of power down when going down a moderate hill.

And really, what is the downside of having the 53x12? Unless you are having trouble with the hills in your 39x25, why would you change? And even if you changed, you could go to a 12-27 or a 12-28. From your account, it isn't clear what problem needs solving, here.
chasm54 is offline  
Old 08-31-12, 02:49 PM
  #27  
Senior Member
 
gear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North shore of Mass.
Posts: 2,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
I'm a masher, I love riding in the 53t ring, I don't like to go to the smaller ring and only use it on real long hills (never the steep ones).

A year ago I bought a bike with a compact double, it's taken me 11 months to get used to the gearing. Some things are so strange like sitting all the way up a hill, coming down a hill and running out of gears way before I want to and keeping my cadence in the high 80s or mid 90s for the whole ride.

Frame and "ride" aside, I have learned to appreciate the compact double. Long hills are a treat and muscle recovery is non existent. Having said that, I still enjoy mashing up a steep hill and the speed I get out of the big double.
gear is offline  
Old 08-31-12, 03:17 PM
  #28  
tsl
Plays in traffic
 
tsl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,971

Bikes: 1996 Litespeed Classic, 2006 Trek Portland, 2013 Ribble Winter/Audax, 2016 Giant Talon 4

Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by chasm54
From your account, it isn't clear what problem needs solving, here.
Agreed.

Using Sheldon Brown's gear calculator, inputting a 50/34 compact crank, 11-23 cassette, and calculating MPH @ 90 RPM, you'll be in the 50x13 combo at 27.1 MPH.

Assuming Ultegra, you'll spend about $300 to go from 53x14 to 50x13 to produce the same 27 MPH at the same 90 RPM. In each case, you'll still have two cogs to go.

I'm not sure what problem that solves, unless you have too much money. And if that's the case, PM me for my depository information. I'll help you dispose of all that nasty cash.

If you really want to do this, and you're interested in the dark gray (almost black) Ultegra 6750 50/34 175mm crank, I may be willing to part with mine, which after next weekend, will have only about 400 miles total on it.

Last edited by tsl; 08-31-12 at 03:23 PM.
tsl is offline  
Old 08-31-12, 06:42 PM
  #29  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
bruce19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lebanon (Liberty Hill), CT
Posts: 8,456

Bikes: CAAD 12, MASI Gran Criterium S, Colnago World Cup CX & Guru steel

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1722 Post(s)
Liked 1,272 Times in 734 Posts
tsl thanks for the offer but my focus is really more on changing out the cogs on the cassette. I can see how my original post is a bit confusing. I was originally being told by fellow riders that I should go to a compact. Then I got the alternative suggestion of just changing the cogs from 12-25 to something like 14-26. I think what got me thinking about all of this was the fact that I don't use the 53x12 or 53x13 very much. I was also curious to see what kind of gearing I could turn at a reasonable rpm now that I'm 66.
bruce19 is offline  
Old 08-31-12, 07:03 PM
  #30  
tsl
Plays in traffic
 
tsl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,971

Bikes: 1996 Litespeed Classic, 2006 Trek Portland, 2013 Ribble Winter/Audax, 2016 Giant Talon 4

Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by bruce19
my focus is really more on changing out the cogs on the cassette. < snip > just changing the cogs from 12-25 to something like 14-26. I think what got me thinking about all of this was the fact that I don't use the 53x12 or 53x13 very much. I was also curious to see what kind of gearing I could turn at a reasonable rpm now that I'm 66.
Ah, it's clearer now. Thanks.

I'm a big fan of multiple cassettes. Two of the first bike tools I bought were a chain whip and cassette lockring tool. My 9 and 10-speed bikes each have a 12-23 and a 12-27. My 8-speed has a 13-23 and 12-28. Once upon a time, I owned a 10-speed Ultegra juniors cassette, 16-27.

In any event, as much as possible, I run the 12-23s because I really like the close ratios at cruising speeds and above. It's part of the reason I've focused on strengthening my climbing, so I that can go on most rides without needing the 27. I'd have give up the 18 to get the 27, and especially in variable headwinds, I like having the 18. I miss it a lot on the 8 and 9-speed bikes. So I've learned to climb using flatlander gearing.

I haven't worried about what I can push in the 53 or 52. I'm in the 39 enough of the time I could probably forego the big ring entirely. I might use it twice in a day for maybe two or three miles total at most. More often, I just don't bother, and back off the power instead. What keeps me in the 12x cassettes instead of switching to a 14x juniors cassette is that I use the 13 a lot, and the 12 a lot more than I should.

I was going to say I have no need of an 11, but then I remembered I also own a 9-speed 11-21. Now there's a flatlander cassette.

Last edited by tsl; 08-31-12 at 07:08 PM.
tsl is offline  
Old 08-31-12, 07:31 PM
  #31  
Have bike, will travel
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Posts: 12,392

Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 910 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times in 158 Posts
One situation where a compact crankset really shines is on rolling routes where flat sections are rare or nonexistent.

If 45% of the route is climbing in the 2 to 15% range and the other 55% of the route is flat or descending, the ability stay on one-chainring-or-the-other is sustainable. The 50t chainring works well on flat sections or sections with sustained descents. The 34t chainring is only usefull when climbing.

When on flat sections and holding a speed in the 19 to 24 mph range, the 34t chainring is inadequate and the 50t is better. However, any short climb of even 3% requires the switch down to the 34t. If the climb is short, the switch back to the 50t comes along soon.

The Compact crankset are the least usefull of all crankset options on flat routes. I'd rather have a single chainring in the 44 to 48 range on a flat route than to use a compact.
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.

Last edited by Barrettscv; 09-02-12 at 07:12 AM.
Barrettscv is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 08:36 AM
  #32  
Senior Member
 
asmac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,261

Bikes: Salsa Vaya

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 172 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Could someone tell me what defines a "compact" crankset?

My frame specs (Salsa Vaya) say it "Fits any road compact double or triple" and I am running a touring triple 48-36-28 (with a 12-36 9sp cassette). I'm big and carry heavy touring loads so getting up hills and not destroying my knees is the goal, not speed.

My current bb is a square taper shimano but I would like to use an external bearing external crankset if possible. People who claim to know tell me that any crankset -- mtb or road -- *should* work as the chainline difference is minute. I hesitate to put down $200-300 without knowing for sure and can only assume the posted specs are there for a reason. Any insight or edumukation would be gratefully received.
asmac is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 08:54 AM
  #33  
tsl
Plays in traffic
 
tsl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,971

Bikes: 1996 Litespeed Classic, 2006 Trek Portland, 2013 Ribble Winter/Audax, 2016 Giant Talon 4

Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by asmac
Could someone tell me what defines a "compact" crankset?
"Compact" refers to the number of teeth, not anything having to do with chainline. In other words, the diameter is compact, not the width.

"Standard" cranksets have 53 and 39 tooth chainrings. Old-school standards are 52/42.

"Compact" cranksets have either 50/34 or 50/36 chainrings. These are generally paired with a wider-ratio cassette with an 11-tooth small cog so that the effective top ratio--50x11--is nearly the same as a 53x12.

Cyclocross cranksets are pairing 46/36 or 42/34 rings.

Your current touring triple and MTB cassette have much lower gearing than any of the above can ever hope to provide. There may be external bearing touring triples out there, I'm just not aware of any.
tsl is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 08:55 AM
  #34  
con
Older I get, faster I was
 
con's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: santa cruz
Posts: 654
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by asmac
Could someone tell me what defines a "compact" crankset?

My frame specs (Salsa Vaya) say it "Fits any road compact double or triple" and I am running a touring triple 48-36-28 (with a 12-36 9sp cassette). I'm big and carry heavy touring loads so getting up hills and not destroying my knees is the goal, not speed.

My current bb is a square taper shimano but I would like to use an external bearing external crankset if possible. People who claim to know tell me that any crankset -- mtb or road -- *should* work as the chainline difference is minute. I hesitate to put down $200-300 without knowing for sure and can only assume the posted specs are there for a reason. Any insight or edumukation would be gratefully received.
The Salsa Vaya will run almost any crank set with an external bearing BB. My Vaya came with a 50/34 compact. I use my Vaya off road and on some very steep dirt climbs and single track so I wanted lower Mt. bike gearing and now have a Mt. double. I did have to change my front derailer to a Sram Mt. It shifted with the road Sram FD, but did so very poorly.

click on the thumbnails

Stock, compact crank


Mt. crank
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
i-5sptxXf-S.jpg (77.3 KB, 18 views)
File Type: jpg
i-GZKJRgP-S.jpg (82.4 KB, 15 views)
con is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 10:33 AM
  #35  
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 642 Times in 363 Posts
OK, now I'll muddy the waters a bit. Everybody talks about how low a hill climb gear they need and how fast a top gear they can use. I think that your favorite flat road gear is equally important.

I want my flat road gear to fall near the middle of the cassette. That way I'll have a couple of trim gears in each direction without having to shift front chainrings.
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 10:35 AM
  #36  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Uncertain
Posts: 8,651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch
OK, now I'll muddy the waters a bit. Everybody talks about how low a hill climb gear they need and how fast a top gear they can use. I think that your favorite flat road gear is equally important.

I want my flat road gear to fall near the middle of the cassette. That way I'll have a couple of trim gears in each direction without having to shift front chainrings.
Yeah, but that really doesn't affect the choice of standard or compact cranks. A 50-16 is pretty much the same as a 53-17
chasm54 is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 11:14 AM
  #37  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by Barrettscv
The Compact crankset are the least usefull of all crankset options on flat routes. I'd rather have a single chainring in the 44 to 48 range on a flat route than to use a compact.
Choice of crankset is personal and a function of your power/weight ratio. While a compact might not be suitable for you on the flats, for others it is just fine. While I'm using a std at the moment a compact makes it a little easier to stay in the big ring when going into a headwind. If I use a compact I do less shifting on the front.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 11:44 AM
  #38  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 43,598

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 197 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7607 Post(s)
Liked 1,354 Times in 861 Posts
53/12 is a bigger gear than Eddy Merckx used to ride on the road. Thirteen was as small as it got, then. He seemed to do OK.
+ the mountains were climbed with a 42:26, or 28t
fietsbob is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 12:14 PM
  #39  
Have bike, will travel
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Posts: 12,392

Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 910 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times in 158 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83
Choice of crankset is personal and a function of your power/weight ratio. While a compact might not be suitable for you on the flats, for others it is just fine. While I'm using a std at the moment a compact makes it a little easier to stay in the big ring when going into a headwind. If I use a compact I do less shifting on the front.
And how much cycling on the flats do you ride in Vancouver, BC?
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.
Barrettscv is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 12:29 PM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by Barrettscv
And how much cycling on the flats do you ride in Vancouver, BC?
I ride a lot in the surrounding suburbs which are mostly flat with occasional 50-200m hills.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 01:41 PM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 642 Times in 363 Posts
Originally Posted by chasm54
Yeah, but that really doesn't affect the choice of standard or compact cranks. A 50-16 is pretty much the same as a 53-17
You're right, with the same cassette it works out to be about one rear gear. That's fine when you're in the middle. If you're battling a head wind, however, that can put you into the situation where frequent front shifts are necessary.

I'm not a particularly strong rider so switching to a 50/34 compact for me traded a couple of fast gears that I never used for a couple of hill climb gears that I really needed. That's the benefit that I was expecting. The unexpected bonus for me was that it allowed me to do all of my flat road riding in the big chainring. Overall I think that switching my road bike to a compact was the best equipment change that I've ever made.
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 02:11 PM
  #42  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Uncertain
Posts: 8,651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch
You're right, with the same cassette it works out to be about one rear gear. That's fine when you're in the middle. If you're battling a head wind, however, that can put you into the situation where frequent front shifts are necessary.

I'm not a particularly strong rider so switching to a 50/34 compact for me traded a couple of fast gears that I never used for a couple of hill climb gears that I really needed. That's the benefit that I was expecting. The unexpected bonus for me was that it allowed me to do all of my flat road riding in the big chainring. Overall I think that switching my road bike to a compact was the best equipment change that I've ever made.
Er, that's fine, except it doesn't address the point you made in the first place, which is that you like your typical gear to be in the middle of the rear cassette. On a 12-25 cassette, the 16 and 17 sprockets are the middle two sprockets. What you now seem to be saying is that you wanted lower gearing, which is of course what a compact is for.
chasm54 is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 02:54 PM
  #43  
Have bike, will travel
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Posts: 12,392

Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 910 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times in 158 Posts
Originally Posted by tsl
"Compact" refers to the number of teeth, not anything having to do with chainline. In other words, the diameter is compact, not the width.

"Standard" cranksets have 53 and 39 tooth chainrings. Old-school standards are 52/42.

"Compact" cranksets have either 50/34 or 50/36 chainrings. These are generally paired with a wider-ratio cassette with an 11-tooth small cog so that the effective top ratio--50x11--is nearly the same as a 53x12.

Cyclocross cranksets are pairing 46/36 or 42/34 rings.

Your current touring triple and MTB cassette have much lower gearing than any of the above can ever hope to provide. There may be external bearing touring triples out there, I'm just not aware of any.
While all of the above is true, the ultimate determining factor that defines the two cranksets in the BCD specification. Compact Cranksets have 110mm BCD spacing and modern standard cranksets have 130mm BCD. The smallest chainring that will fit on a 130mm BCD crankset is 38t. The smallest chainring that will fit on a 110mm BCD crankset is 33t.

I have a Deore MTB "trekking" triple with Hollowtech II external bearings and 48, 36 & a non-standard 22t. This crankset is sometimes seen on touring models from Jamis and other.

__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.

Last edited by Barrettscv; 09-02-12 at 04:27 PM.
Barrettscv is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 04:28 PM
  #44  
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 642 Times in 363 Posts
Originally Posted by chasm54
Er, that's fine, except it doesn't address the point you made in the first place, which is that you like your typical gear to be in the middle of the rear cassette. On a 12-25 cassette, the 16 and 17 sprockets are the middle two sprockets. What you now seem to be saying is that you wanted lower gearing, which is of course what a compact is for.
I think that you are so anxious to argue that you ignored my last paragraph. The unexpected benefit of not having to shift chainrings as often is the point that I was trying to make.
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 04:30 PM
  #45  
Semper Fidelis
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,000

Bikes: Tiemeyer Road Bike & Ridley Domicles

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
i have a compact 50/34 on one bike and a 53/39 on another bike

Really the only difference inmo is that using a compact defiantly helps produce a better spin in any gear that you use.otherwise i find that you loose a lot of top end speed in the long run. it all depends on what you want and how you want to ride
HAMMER MAN is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 04:39 PM
  #46  
Banned.
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Uncertain
Posts: 8,651
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch
I think that you are so anxious to argue that you ignored my last paragraph. The unexpected benefit of not having to shift chainrings as often is the point that I was trying to make.
I think that you are so anxious to justify your position that you ignore the fact that you are talking nonsense. In my experience, the disadvantage of a compact is that it results in much more frequent shifting up front. YMMV, but I doubt it.

Go back and read what you have posted. I think you'll find that your second argument bears no relation to your first. But hey, the important thing is to save face, right?
chasm54 is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 04:40 PM
  #47  
Have bike, will travel
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Posts: 12,392

Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 910 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times in 158 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83
I ride a lot in the surrounding suburbs which are mostly flat with occasional 50-200m hills.
I was very happy with a 46 & 38t Cyclocross crankset and a 11-23 ten speed cassette on windy & flat routes. I could keep a tight 92 to 100 rpm cadence from 15 to 33 mph.

A 50t chainring needs a wider cadence range below 22 mph when the 17-19-21 cogs require more than a 10% change in cadence with each gear change.
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.
Barrettscv is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 05:09 PM
  #48  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by Barrettscv
I was very happy with a 46 & 38t Cyclocross crankset and a 11-23 ten speed cassette on windy & flat routes. I could keep a tight 92 to 100 rpm cadence from 15 to 33 mph.

A 50t chainring needs a wider cadence range below 22 mph when the 17-19-21 cogs require more than a 10% change in cadence with each gear change.
I guess I have a wider comfortable cadence range as I'm happy with a compact or std. I think a 46 would be OK for normal riding but a little small for races.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 05:25 PM
  #49  
Have bike, will travel
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Posts: 12,392

Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 910 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times in 158 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83
I guess I have a wider comfortable cadence range as I'm happy with a compact or std. I think a 46 would be OK for normal riding but a little small for races.
Don't worry about my cadence range, my Garmin reports a max of 107 rpm or more without really trying and I'm good at producing plenty of watts down to 40 rpm.

I would only recommend a Cyclocross crankset as a road crank for pool-table flat routes.

Not too many 50+ cyclist are holding 33 mph without some help from a 3% slope, a 15 mph tail-wind or a nice position in the middle of a large peloton at the TDF.
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.

Last edited by Barrettscv; 09-02-12 at 05:49 PM.
Barrettscv is offline  
Old 09-02-12, 05:48 PM
  #50  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,201
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1186 Post(s)
Liked 289 Times in 177 Posts
Originally Posted by Barrettscv
I would only recommend it for pool-table flat routes. Not too many 50+ cyclist are holding 33 mph without some help from a 3% slope, a 15 mph tail-wind or a nice position in the middle of a large peloton at the TDF.
I normally ride crits in my 15 or 16 and end up in the 12 or 13 for the sprint. I only have a 12 so using a 46 might be harder to sprint in. Not that it would make much difference to my results
gregf83 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.