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


Go Back   > >

General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-25-13, 04:44 PM   #1
R88
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
R88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Alaska
Bikes: Novara Randonee, Specialized Rockhopper
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
20 speed vs. 30 speed

It's been a long time since I've been in the market for a new bike. I'm seeing some nice road bikes with 2 chain rings instead of the 3 chain rings I'm used to. I can see where this would be an unremarkable difference if you ride on primarily flat terrain but if you live in a moutainous region I would think there would be an advantage to having more gear choices. I am not a high performance rider, looking mainly to get from point A to point B with as much fun and perhaps a couple of donuts along the way. I was wondering what others think of this trend and what their thoughts are of 20 speed bikes.
R88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-13, 05:06 PM   #2
mprelaw
Senior Member
 
mprelaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Bikes:
Posts: 2,318
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There are several different double cranksets available on road bikes. The most common, especially on entry level bikes and most "endurance" geometry ones, are compact doubles, which have a 50 tooth big ring, and a 34 tooth small ring. With a 10 speed rear cogset (called a cassette on modern bikes), they offer a wide range of options. You can get a SRAM Apex group that has a 32 tooth cog as its largest rear gear (called a "granny" or bail-out gear). This set up allows climbing almost as easily as most triple cranksets, and is easier to keep tuned than the less expensive triples. Probably the most common rear cassette on bikes with a compact crank is an 11-28 tooth. Your 34 front/28 rear combo should get you all but the most challenging climbs. Higher end race geometry bikes may have a "standard" double crankset up front. Today's standard double uses a 53/39 big/small ring combo. Obviously, for climbing, it'll be harder to use a 39 front 28 rear combo to get up those bigger hills, but many riders do it. Racers may use something like a 11-25 or even an 11-23 cassette on the back with a standard double. In between the compact and the standard, there's a "mid-compact" crankset with a 52/36 big/small ring combination.

If you go with a double up front, you should look at the 50/34 compact. If you even think that you need a triple to handle your hills, you won't be happy with a standard or mid-compact crank.

Test ride a compact double before deciding, and take on what you think a typical hill is for your area. If it doesn't cut it, and you think you need a triple, go with the triple.
mprelaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-13, 06:00 PM   #3
dynaryder
PatronSaintOfDiscBrakes
 
dynaryder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: BicycleSPACE warehouse in SW Washington DC
Bikes:
Posts: 6,983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Sheldon's excellent gear calculator:
http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

Plug in the numbers for your current bike,then plug in the numbers for a bike you're looking at. Then you can see how they compare.
__________________

C'dale BBU('05 and '09)/Super Six/Hooligan8and 3,Kona Dew Deluxe,Novara Buzz/Safari,Surly Big Dummy,Marin Pt Reyes,Giant Defy 1,Schwinn DBX SuperSport,Dahon Speed Pro TT,Brompton S6L/S2E-X
dynaryder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 09:13 AM   #4
Luvdabeach2001
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Bikes:
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynaryder View Post
Sheldon's excellent gear calculator:
http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

Plug in the numbers for your current bike,then plug in the numbers for a bike you're looking at. Then you can see how they compare.
+1
Luvdabeach2001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 09:41 AM   #5
Retro Grouch 
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Bikes: Rans Rockst (Retro rocket) Rans Enduro Sport (Retro racket) Catrike 559, Merin Bear Valley (beater bike).
Posts: 26,614
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
If you have any doubt whatever in your mind, get the triple.

"Almost" means "isn't".
"allows climbing almost as easily" means .....

Oh, and triples are harder to keep tuned is baloney.
Retro Grouch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 10:10 AM   #6
wphamilton
rugged individualist
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Posts: 9,878
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 207 Post(s)
I have two road bikes, one is a triple and one single, so I don't have an informed opinion about maintenance on a double. But I have no particular reason for the triple; it's what came on the bike and is just extra weight as far as I'm concerned. The best approach is to look at the terrain you'll be riding, figure out the minimum gear inches you'll be happy with, then compare that to the charts of various configurations. Then keep in mind that the advantage of the smaller ranges in cassettes are the closer spacing of gear ratios between shifts.

The very top gear - 52x11, 48x13 or whatever - is more a "specialty" gear than anything else. If you want to push your speed downhill, have the best possible sprint, keep up in the draft of a really fast rider. So to answer your question about the trend and 20 speed bikes, there's a good reason for all of the configurations. Personally I'm a bit of an iconoclast that I'd rather have an 8 speed cassette, for the better durability and cheaper maintenance. I have a 1x8 on my commuter road bike, perfect for my commute but more challenging on our hills.
wphamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 11:29 AM   #7
Looigi
Senior Member
 
Looigi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 8,951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
What's important is the total range of gearing and the spacing between adjacent gears. Usually, the number of gears is more than necessary as there is a lot of overlap and redundancy.
Looigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 12:30 PM   #8
steve0257
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rochester MN
Bikes: Raleigh Port Townsend, Schwinn World Traveler converted to a frankenbike three speed, Bianci Roadmaster,
Posts: 860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have both a double and a triple. In my case the low gears are just about the same. The double is actually marginally lower by about 2 gear inches. What the triple gives are more choices in the intermediate gears making it easier to tune your gear to the conditions.
steve0257 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 12:51 PM   #9
Ozonation
Senior Member
 
Ozonation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
Bikes: Rivendell Sam Hillborne DTT in Awesome Green; Brompton M6R (reduced gearing) in Sage Green; GT Timberline Hybrid (10 years old!)
Posts: 1,015
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I still remember when 10 speeds were all the rage, and - gasp - the buzz around a - wait for it - a 12 speed!

I have a six speed internal hub on my Brompton with reduced gearing for hills and I can tell you that it is more than adequate for the type of riding you're describing. My only wish is that it could go a little faster, but I can tell you it can go plenty fast.

I think that so long as the gearing range covers most of the types of riding you're considering, you'll get a bigger bang-for-the-buck looking at other details: higher end components, better seat, racks and panniers, etc.
Ozonation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 01:06 PM   #10
bobn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: South Florida
Bikes:
Posts: 726
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Maybe someone should design a cvt/cvs transmission for a bike.
No gears
bobn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 01:55 PM   #11
ThermionicScott 
Gratuitous glib and snark
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Posts: 13,417
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
I've been gravitating toward 14-speed setups as of late. That is, on the bikes that have more than one speed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobn View Post
Maybe someone should design a cvt/cvs transmission for a bike.
No gears
They've been trying for eons -- check out the NuVinci.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 02:20 PM   #12
RaleighSport
Hogosha Sekai
 
RaleighSport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: STS
Bikes: Leader 725, Centurion Turbo, Scwhinn Tempo, Schwinn Premis, GT Tequesta, Bridgestone CB-2,72' Centurion Lemans
Posts: 6,543
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
I've been gravitating toward 14-speed setups as of late. That is, on the bikes that have more than one speed.



They've been trying for eons -- check out the NuVinci.
Throw on a triple and you'll have 21 and still can claim it's a 7 drivetrain at least that's what I did.
RaleighSport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 02:31 PM   #13
ThermionicScott 
Gratuitous glib and snark
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Posts: 13,417
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 134 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaleighSport View Post
Throw on a triple and you'll have 21 and still can claim it's a 7 drivetrain at least that's what I did.
After all this work I did to wean myself off granny gears?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 02:39 PM   #14
RaleighSport
Hogosha Sekai
 
RaleighSport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: STS
Bikes: Leader 725, Centurion Turbo, Scwhinn Tempo, Schwinn Premis, GT Tequesta, Bridgestone CB-2,72' Centurion Lemans
Posts: 6,543
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
After all this work I did to wean myself off granny gears?
Buy one of those quad converters, put a 16 on the inside and claim you never ever ever ever touch your granny gears!
RaleighSport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 03:03 PM   #15
R88
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
R88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Alaska
Bikes: Novara Randonee, Specialized Rockhopper
Posts: 84
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thank you for all your replies, this gives me much needed informtion. Thanks especially to Dynaryder for the link to Sheldon's gear calculator, that should give me a clear idea how a double crank will compare to my current triple crank set. I also agree that I've never had a problem with tuning a triple crank. My biggest concern is the 10 sped cog bumping up the costs of replacement chains and cogs well over my current 7 speed cogset. Thank you all again for your time & sharing your knowledge.
R88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 03:05 PM   #16
RaleighSport
Hogosha Sekai
 
RaleighSport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: STS
Bikes: Leader 725, Centurion Turbo, Scwhinn Tempo, Schwinn Premis, GT Tequesta, Bridgestone CB-2,72' Centurion Lemans
Posts: 6,543
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by R88 View Post
Thank you for all your replies, this gives me much needed informtion. Thanks especially to Dynaryder for the link to Sheldon's gear calculator, that should give me a clear idea how a double crank will compare to my current triple crank set. I also agree that I've never had a problem with tuning a triple crank. My biggest concern is the 10 sped cog bumping up the costs of replacement chains and cogs well over my current 7 speed cogset. Thank you all again for your time & sharing your knowledge.
I don't know if this was mentioned previously but I don't recall seeing it, 7 speed chains are also more durable than 10 speed chains. Yet another fact to consider.
RaleighSport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 03:45 PM   #17
whk1992
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Bikes: 89' Trek 400
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
I have two road bikes, one is a triple and one single, so I don't have an informed opinion about maintenance on a double. But I have no particular reason for the triple; it's what came on the bike and is just extra weight as far as I'm concerned. The best approach is to look at the terrain you'll be riding, figure out the minimum gear inches you'll be happy with, then compare that to the charts of various configurations. Then keep in mind that the advantage of the smaller ranges in cassettes are the closer spacing of gear ratios between shifts.

The very top gear - 52x11, 48x13 or whatever - is more a "specialty" gear than anything else. If you want to push your speed downhill, have the best possible sprint, keep up in the draft of a really fast rider. So to answer your question about the trend and 20 speed bikes, there's a good reason for all of the configurations. Personally I'm a bit of an iconoclast that I'd rather have an 8 speed cassette, for the better durability and cheaper maintenance. I have a 1x8 on my commuter road bike, perfect for my commute but more challenging on our hills.
That's exactly what I did last month!
My bike used to have two chainrings. I figured out that I'd never use the larger chainring in urban area, so I removed that and the front derailleur. The routine maintenance is much easier now, as I only need to adjust H-L bolts at the rear without worrying about chain rubbing the front derailleur. 1x6 speed is good enough for urban area, honestly, and that I'm still biking faster than most mountain bikes on the paved trail.
whk1992 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 05:41 PM   #18
dynaryder
PatronSaintOfDiscBrakes
 
dynaryder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: BicycleSPACE warehouse in SW Washington DC
Bikes:
Posts: 6,983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by R88 View Post
My biggest concern is the 10 sped cog bumping up the costs of replacement chains and cogs well over my current 7 speed cogset.
This is the heart of my 10spd rant;10spd is fine for racers in competition,but for regular people 9 and even 8spd works just as well for much less money. Unfortunately,Shimano really wants the world to go 10spd.
__________________

C'dale BBU('05 and '09)/Super Six/Hooligan8and 3,Kona Dew Deluxe,Novara Buzz/Safari,Surly Big Dummy,Marin Pt Reyes,Giant Defy 1,Schwinn DBX SuperSport,Dahon Speed Pro TT,Brompton S6L/S2E-X
dynaryder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 06:47 PM   #19
krobinson103
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Incheon, South Korea
Bikes: Nothing amazing... cheap old 21 speed mtb
Posts: 2,837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have both 9 speed and 7 speed bikes. The high and low ratoos are identical so its only the spacing that really changes. I don't feel that the 9 speed gives mea better ride than the 7 speed other than being a bit more crisp in the shifts due to nicer compenents.
krobinson103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 07:35 PM   #20
Velo Dog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Bikes:
Posts: 3,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch View Post
If you have any doubt whatever in your mind, get the triple.
"Almost" means "isn't".
"allows climbing almost as easily" means .....
Oh, and triples are harder to keep tuned is baloney.
This. Emphatically this. I live in the Sierra, with 7000-9000 foot passes all around my home at 4900 feet. I suffered for about two decades because I thought triples were for sissies or were too hard to maintain. Finally I gave in, and I wish I'd done it in 1980. If you don't need the granny, you don't have to use it, but it's really nice to have it when you do. I've done 12,000 miles on two bikes with triples, and I've found NO disadvantages.
Velo Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 08:15 PM   #21
GT4
Goofy Goober
 
GT4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Francisco
Bikes: Fuji SL 3.0, Motobecane Track, Specialized Rockhopper FS, low track standard
Posts: 331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My mountain bike has 3 chainrings. Shifting the FD is so frustrating, I usually end up shifting from the smallest chainring to the biggest chainring when I want to shift to the middle, it pisses me off; I'm looking into the 1x10 or 1x11 drivetrains. Things change for a reason, so using my logic and past experience, I will tell you that 2 chainrings is better than 3. My roadie only has 2 chainrings and I still ONLY use the small chainring when going up this 40* hill, which I am sure is not in many places.
GT4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 08:58 PM   #22
Jeff Wills
Insane Bicycle Mechanic
 
Jeff Wills's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: other Vancouver
Bikes:
Posts: 7,950
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GT4 View Post
My mountain bike has 3 chainrings. Shifting the FD is so frustrating, I usually end up shifting from the smallest chainring to the biggest chainring when I want to shift to the middle, it pisses me off; I'm looking into the 1x10 or 1x11 drivetrains. Things change for a reason, so using my logic and past experience, I will tell you that 2 chainrings is better than 3. My roadie only has 2 chainrings and I still ONLY use the small chainring when going up this 40* hill, which I am sure is not in many places.
Then something is out of adjustment. My triple chainring bikes shift cleanly up and down, 1-2-3 and 3-2-1. No muss, no fuss. The road bike's rings jump from a 24 tooth granny to 42 tooth middle, which is well outside of the recommended range of the derailleur.
__________________
Jeff Wills

Comcast nuked my web page. It will return soon..
Jeff Wills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-13, 09:04 PM   #23
cplager
The Recumbent Quant
 
cplager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Norwalk, CT
Bikes: 2012 Cruzbike Sofrider, 2013 Cruzigami Mantis
Posts: 3,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velo Dog View Post
This. Emphatically this. I live in the Sierra, with 7000-9000 foot passes all around my home at 4900 feet. I suffered for about two decades because I thought triples were for sissies or were too hard to maintain. Finally I gave in, and I wish I'd done it in 1980. If you don't need the granny, you don't have to use it, but it's really nice to have it when you do. I've done 12,000 miles on two bikes with triples, and I've found NO disadvantages.
If you were leaning towards a double, I might try to convince you to try a triple. Since you are leaning towards triple, do that. The disadvantages are quite small (slightly heavier, slightly bigger Q factor (pedals wider)) but these pale in comparison of wanting lower gears and not finding it.

Cheers,
Charles
cplager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-13, 12:16 AM   #24
MetalPedaler
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Wherever u see a fred, I am there.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I only actually use about 9 of my 24 gears.....A triple is nice for hilly areas (such as where I live)...but you can often get as low or lower gearing with a compact double, with an 28, 30 or 32 cog in the rear.

I may be buying an older bike.....so on my last ride, I figgered I wouldn't use any gear lower than the middle chain ring(40) and the 23 cog- to simulate what it would be like to ride a bike with a standard 39/23 combo as the lowest available gear. You know...it actually HELPED my cycling- and on that 15 mile ride, I never used the lower gears, even on the hills....except for the very worst hill on the last 2 miles of my ride. And that ride was my best time ever...and made me feel really good! My point: Sometimes low gearing, although necessary (especially for weak noobs, like myself) can be a crutch and a handicap, and can be an obstacle to progress. (Although, I'm glad I didn't go with an older, standard geared bike as my first bike...as I NEVER would have been able to ride it!)
MetalPedaler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-13, 01:57 AM   #25
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 19,670
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 451 Post(s)
Dear Marketing Victim, speeds Is a hardware count.. Gear Ratios is what actually turns the wheel..
think about the range of ratios, not the Parts colunt.

a nice triple crank 9 speed saves a pile of $.. and works fine..


my triple : 50, 40, 24t.. i found a 95" gear high enough.. 50:14
low , the 24:34 turning a 700- 32 tire ,took me many thousands of touring KM..
bringing camping gear ..

With out, gear aboard the 24:28 worked fine.. climbing mountains..

Last edited by fietsbob; 02-04-13 at 12:46 PM.
fietsbob 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 03:58 AM.