Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Gained weight/can't climb anymore/need lower ratio

    My bike has an ultegra double 6600 front derailleur, dura ace 7800 rear, ultegra 12-25 cassette, and an FSA Gossamer Cross crank with 36 and 46 rings. Ideally, I'd like to broaden my gear range, but realistically, I'm okay with trading some of my high gears for a low, granny, climbing gear.

    Does anybody know what my options are? How much can I achieve by swapping rings.. or the cassette? What's the smallest ring I can have in front? The largest cassette in back? What about that 11-34 mega range cassette?

    Thanks

  2. #2
    .
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Hillsboro, Oregon
    My Bikes
    Moots Psychlo-x ybb, Soma ES, Trek 950
    Posts
    3,768
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You could go down to a 34 on the crank and 27 on the cassette. To go to the mtb cassette, you'd need to change your rear derailleur and get a new chain. Your best bang for your buck though is to lose the extra weight.
    Demented internet tail wagging imbicile.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Athens, Ohio
    My Bikes
    Custom Custom Custom
    Posts
    5,104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What kind of course has you maxed out at 36-25? Its probably faster to get off and run.

    A 34t is realistically the smallest front ring you can find, though technically a 33 is possible (good luck finding one)

    You can go as low as 28 in the rear.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree-- that small of a difference in gain ratio is definitely not worth the cassette and chainring swap.

    I don't race; this is an issue with road and trail riding-- besides the weight gain centric issues, I'd also just like more versatility.

    I'm currently working on the weight loss and will be looking into a complete drivetrain swap.

    Thanks for the help.

  5. #5
    Overacting because I can SpongeDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Mean Streets of Bethesda, MD
    My Bikes
    Merlin Agilis, Trek 1500
    Posts
    4,551
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    going to a 34/27 low end is a solid drop from 36/25. Adding a Deore RD will give you more flexibility out back if you need it. I have one on my CX bike and it hasn't been a problem racing.
    “Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm." (Churchill)

    "I am a courageous cyclist." (SpongeDad)

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tricross Sport 2009, Giant Yukon FX3
    Posts
    1,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I discovered recently on a very long steep fire trail ascent with maybe 10kg of load that I could ride 26-34 at 5kph, or walk and push it at 4kph. The difference is that riding got me out of breath, used far more energy, and wasn't sustainable. I don't know how that would compare to an unloaded race situation with running vs standing and mashing the pedals, but I found it interesting nonetheless.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    56
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have recently thought a lot about this myself, and wasn't going to post about it here, but you might find this interesting.

    Oddly enough, I just purchased a new bike, went from a 53/39/30 with a 11-34 cassette (tri-cross triple, set up stock) to an '01 poprad frame built up with a 46/36 and a 12-25. I live in a pretty hilly area and am not an experienced rider at all - before a month ago I'd been on a bicycle less than a dozen times in the previous 15 years of my life, and I'm 30. While I do want to race cross once I get my fitness level up, I also want to be able to cruise around, and really would prefer not to have two bikes. Yet. It's pretty much inevitable I'm going to have a second bike at some point in time, but having two cross bikes when I like one better just seems extremely redundant and a waste of (sadly) limited resources. Anyway, I've been looking at a few options, and last night made myself a spreadsheet.

    http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?k...0Q&output=html

    I'm a total new guy to the biking world, but I figure if the cadence is equal, the speed will tell me which gear is easier/harder to pedal in. There's probably a different metric I could be using - and I'd be happy to take any suggestions. If I call something by the wrong name, be patient.

    The first sheet, I wanted to look at which would be more dramatic of a change - changing to a smaller chainring on the smaller crank, or getting a larger cassette. It looks like moving from a 36 to a 34 tooth chainring in front has just about the exact same effect on speed as moving from a 25 tooth to a 27 tooth cassette. 36/27 at a cadence of 60 = 8.9179mph, and 34/25 at a cadence of 60 = 9.0963. That's pretty damn close, and I'd much rather change out the cassette than start f'n with the crankset - but it gets even more effective when you look further.

    From Sheldon Brown regarding capacity of a derailleur:
    Manufacturers specify this fairly conservatively. They must do so, because they have to assume that some of their derailers will be sold to incompetent cyclists, who will abuse their drive trains by using the smallest chainwheel with the smaller rear sprockets.

    Competent riders can considerably exceed the official rated capacity, since they will not misuse the granny ring by running it with the smaller rear sprockets, so it doesn't matter if the chain hangs slack in those gears.

    Rear derailers are also commonly designed for a particular maximum size rear sprocket. If you exceed this size, by too much, the jockey pulley may rub against the sprocket when using the lowest gear.

    Rated maximum rear sprocket size, however, is also commonly much lower than what actually works. For instance, Shimano's models designated as "road" derailers are generally listed for a "maximum" sprocket of 27 teeth...because 27 teeth is the largest size that they make in a designated "road" cassette. However, in almost all cases, these derailers, even the short-cage models, will handle rear sprockets as large as 30 teeth in practice. (This somewhat depends on the design of the frame's derailer hanger, so once in a while you will find a particular installation where you can't use a 30, but I've never seen one where a 28 wouldn't work.
    So now I'm pretty much positive I'm going to change the cassette (because really, becoming a stronger rider just sounds like a lot of work), it's just a matter of which cassette. I compared three cassettes throughout the full range of gears at cadences of 45, 60, and 90. Not that I'm pushing 90 yet, but hey, a guy can dream, right? The three are as follows (from a quick search last night, any suggestions are welcome.) the comparisons are on sheet 2 of the spreadsheet I linked earlier.

    Ultegra 12-27 - 210g, $90 at my LBS, $64 shipped online. I'd really rather buy from the LBS, but dammit, that's $26.
    Harris Cycling (off SB's site, shimano cassettes rearranged to gear sizes not available from shimano) 13-30 - 310g, $113
    SRAM PG-950 - 370g, $31 + shipping.

    Random thought - there's only two gears on the small chainring that are slower than the slowest gear on the large chainring. I think I should spend most of my time on the larger chainring, especially if I get the 13-30 after reading what Sheldon had to say.

    If anybody's actually made it this far through my rambling rookie gearing manifesto, I'd love some feedback on my decision. First off, I'd like to congratulate you, as my girlfriend races on a cross team and sells bikes for a living, and I think she's growing tired of me sharing stuff I've figured out that anyone who knows anything about bikes sees as common knowledge. She's gracious though. I'm not a huge weight weenie, but if I'm going to be a weight weenie about anything, it really seems to make sense to worry about the weight of something that you're spinning around with your legs as well as moving forward - and the difference between the sram and the ultegra is a third of a pound. That seems like a lot. A decent burger, even. It doesn't seem remotely worth it for the extra 20 or so bucks it would cost for the ultegra if I buy it online and then slink into the LBS to have it installed - or maybe I'll google it and give it a go myself. I'll work on the drivetrain, worst that happens is that I can't go. I had the LBS install interrupter brakes. Not being able to stop would suck

    So, that leaves me with the 12-27 or the 13-30. I'm not concerned with the derailleur capacity, as I'd spend 85% of my time on the 46 tooth ring - and 46/30 is a slower gear than everything on my current setup except the 36/25, my lowest. I'd only be using the 36 inch chainring for the lowest three gears, which don't leave too much slack at all. I'm not concerned with the difference between 12 and 13 - and if I was, harris has a 12-30 as well. At a cadence of 90, 46/13 is over 35 mph. I don't go faster than that.

    There are two distinct differences I'd love to hear your thoughts on. Weight and price. $113 isn't prohibitive, but it's over double the cost of the ultegra. In addition, it's also 100 grams heavier. My main question is how much the weight will matter in a cassette - because I like the gearing of the 13-30 a lot better. But hell, after I pay the LBS $25 to install it, I'll have shelled out $138 to change the cassette on a bike I paid $500 for. This seems silly to me, and that money could go toward a carbon fork so I don't feel like I'm riding an electric hand mixer when I brake hard.

    Thoughts are welcome if you've made it this far, and if I've made any incorrect assumptions you're more than welcome to correct me. I have a lot to learn. And wow, I just puked up a whole lot about this.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    My Bikes
    Specialized Tricross Sport 2009, Giant Yukon FX3
    Posts
    1,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, I read all the way through, but I don't know anything more than you do. I would say that 100g doesn't sound like much to me. I especially don't think I'd be shelling out money to save grams on a $500 bike, when you're not that fit, and you're not racing.

    Case in point, when I recently switched from a 30t to a 26t granny gear, I had the option of steel or aluminium. The steel was heavier but cheaper. Which did I choose? Steel. Because it lasts longer. The weight and money seemed pretty inconsequential in the long term.

    Btw, are you sure you can't pedal at 90? In the brief moments that my cadence meter worked, I found I pedalled in the low 80s by default, and 90 wasn't a stretch.

  9. #9
    Tiocfáidh ár Lá jfmckenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    The edge of b#
    My Bikes
    A whole bunch-a bikes.
    Posts
    5,410
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Mountain dérailleur and mountain cassette and you'll be able to go anywhere. If it's too steep for that ratio you may as well just walk, thats what I do anyway

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    56
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for the thoughts. You're probably right re:weight.

    I don't know exactly what my cadence is, on the flat I can probably do 90, but I find it slows significantly at the end of a ride (~20 miles or so) and going up hills - especially after going from a 30 front/34 rear granny to a 36 front/25 rear.

    I met a guy who works for FSA, and he's hooking me up with a 34 tooth chainring that'll work on my energy crankset. It won't make a huge difference, but I'll know a little more, learn how to change 'em out, and I'll just keep pedaling and learning.
    Last edited by masont; 10-29-09 at 11:57 AM.

  11. #11
    old and in the way grueling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Carbondale, CO
    My Bikes
    Alpe Duez Centaur, Custom CX DA
    Posts
    147
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I try to race, even at 250 lbs. The mountain courses in CO have some pretty good climbs, several at over 9,000'. I switched to running the 30 and 42 rings, from a road triple, and an 11-26 cassette. The 30x26 allows for some serious steeps, even for a fat guy like me. Anything you can't ride in that gear should definitely be run (walked in my case). In fact, I havent found any hill that I didnt have enough gearing for this year - the ones I have run were due to trail conditions, not gears.

  12. #12
    RFC
    RFC is offline
    Senior Member RFC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    My Bikes
    many
    Posts
    4,432
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Another cheaper option. BTW I assume you are talking about 9-speed. Nashbar has a decent house brand 11-28 cassette for about $25. I have used one for about 1,000 miles with no problem.

    This spread will give you more options both high and low. Before you say you will never use the 11, with a 46t big chainring, the 46/11 is about the equivalent of a standard 53/13, so it's not all that high.

Posting Permissions

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