ejewels

Thanks for all of the info. So is my Sora gear ranges normal for most road bikes? Like if I bought a TCR or a more race oriented bike... How are those usually setup? I do some hills where I am but also some flats. So a good all around gearing is what I need.

Bike Gremlin

old 10 speed also needs super quality housing, cables and routing to work OK)

15 and below is a lot more critical in terms of air drag, gear inch jumps etc IMO.

Depends on one's priorities.

I think I presented all the pros and cons - except the quicker shifting of more sprockets, compared to less.

I also see no point in saying 8 has less speeds, if I said "the advantage of 10 is it has more speeds".

PepeM

You're in luck because good all around gearing is what you have.

A TCR would probably come with 52/36 rings and 11-28 cassette, so taller gearing all around.

As you become more experienced (and work on your cadence) you will start noticing which cogs you use and which you don't and will be able to figure out whether a different cassette might be beneficial. That's like a $20 upgrade. But don't worry about it just yet, what you have is good for your current level.

Bike Gremlin

With a compact 50-34 crankset, you get decent gear range. If you need slower speeds for climbs, you get a 12-32 cassette. If you never use large sprockets at the back, you'd be better off with a "tighter" 12-27 cassette.

On flats I never use faster gearing than 50-13, and seldom go over 26 at the back when climbing, so a perfect cassette for me would be a 13-26.


Like it was discussed a few posts before, if you have a certain combination that you use most of the time (like the mentioned 16 tooth sprocket), make sure whichever cassette you buy has that sprocket.

Some basics of bicycle gearing are explained here:

Bicycle gear ratios - speeds, gear inches

wphamilton

It doesn't max out if you set the tire number. The magic number is 1666 if I recall correctly, set to metric. Add a 0 (ie times the display by 10) to read cadence. 6.5 on the screen is 65 for example, 12.0 is 120 cadence.

wphamilton

but only 12% jump in cadence, from 17 to 15, if you keep the same power. If a person is accustomed to a wider range of cadence it's not that critical to have that 16.

Phil_gretz

@ejewels - your bike and gearing are fine. You really need to heed the advice given: ride more, and with higher cadence - and I'll add one more. Make sure that the bike is set up correctly for fit. Otherwise, you don't need to change any equipment. Just ride more. And make certain to avoid "muscling" higher gears. This is bike riding, not weight lifting. Find a fast cadence that will become the new normal for you. It might be 90 rpm, or it might be 85 rpm. You must discover that on your own. PG

Bike Gremlin

+1

90 rpm cadence seems extremely fast to some people. Until one gets accustomed, it takes some practice. Once you get used to "high" cadence, you'll see what the optimal one is for you, after you break the "barrier" and realise how easier it gets in the long run to spin faster.

redfooj

maybe my maff are off but a solid output of 300w from 175 cranks require only 16kg of (constant) force applied to the pedals, assuming relatively slow 80rpm.
okay in actual riding you might have to press a bit more since you dont really push that through the whole stroke, but ballpark rules apply.

in which case weight training wont help none

ejewels

Thanks for all of the feedback, guys.

2lo8

No it doesn't. This is factually wrong unless you consider standard equipment stainless slick cables and compresionless SIS housing to be super quality. If that's the case, then it has nothing to do with 10 speed, it has nothing to do with old 10 speed.

It only vaguely has something to do with last generation 10 speed which used PTFE cables for last generation 10 speed, but still work with stainless inners. The housing was still standard SP-41. There was, nothing special about the housing. This is just wrong and a complete fabrication unless you're so retrogrouchy you think compresionless shift housing is special, which again, has nothing to do with old 10 speed.

Moving the goalposts. When did I say or imply a 16t was more important than 15t and so on?

You're free to have your own priorities. You don't need to make up imaginary reasons and overgeneralizations not to buy more expensive parts.

I did mention that, but one could make the argument about other 1t jumps being small. The argument was that 16t didn't matter because of aero, not that 16t didn't matter because the jump is small. 15 to 13 is only 13% different, so why have a 14t? The point was simply that the reason you would cut the jump with a 14t doesn't magically stop existing at 15t. Sure it's less, but it's not non-existent.

True, except on more displays it looks more like:
6.5


It still helps develop the muscles, but doesn't do much at all for sustained efforts where it's mostly the cardiovascular system. That's why pros get their VO2 tests and altitude training. Unless you like to slamdance.

Bike Gremlin

I stand corrected. Decent, not very cheap housing is needed. Shimano 41 is good quality, but three times the price of what LBSs in my city work with 90% of the time. So it's different point of view.

Up to 8 speed stuff works with the cheap stuff well as well, though.

All I said was that over 15 teeth, one tooth jumps are not that critical nor crucial. Not sure what your point is.

Hmm, that goes both ways - why buy more expensive parts if there's minimal or no gain?

Because at those gear ratios, using 90sh rpm cadence, the wind drag is a lot more of a factor. It increases with the square of speed increase, and the power needed to overcome it is even greater (power of 3 is the English term?). That's why a jump from 14 to 13 is a lot more "painful" than one from 17 to 15.

Homebrew01

No.

2lo8

SP41 is the same stuff that comes with Claris. It's Shimano's basic lined compression index housing. The Jagwire LEX stuff is basically the same. LBS level bikes usually come with one or the other. Unless everything is a Walmart bike I am extremely skeptical of that claim.


You justified it by claiming wind drag was an issue, and implied it wasn't the case for 16/17. But sure, you didn't explicitly say it.

How does it go both ways? I never told you to buy parts you wouldn't make good use of. I objected to making things up as excuses to not upgrade. There are plenty of real arguments why you don't need extra gears.

I don't entirely understand what you're trying to say, but I'm pretty sure I disagree. The reason why it's more painful is because you're in a higher HR zone and hitting your limits. Again, using using the same parameters used to generate power figures. Bikecalc spits out 383w for 25.1mph or 50x14 and 474w for 27.1mph or 50x13. A 24% difference compared to the earlier 41% difference. Adding a headwind still shifts where you want your 1t zone to be as it changed the relation between your wheel speed and your air speed.

CliffordK

As far as the OP's question. 10 or 11 speed doesn't necessarily give higher or lower gears than 9 speed.

One can buy all the same low and high sprockets and chainrings for 9s as are available for 11s.

What it does allow are packing in more sprockets in the middle. This allows choosing the perfect sprocket for any given moment.

Bike Gremlin

But you put it in my mouth?

Not sure what your problem is. I've explained the flaws of old 10 speed system. Objectively. You seem to think they are not affecting the functioning. That is where I can't agree with you and that's it. I see no point in pursuing this any further, as it can go on and on.

Same for wind drag. "Don't understand but know I don't agree".

2lo8

So why don't you clarify what you meant by this. Sure I'm putting words in your mouth.

So why don't you explicitly confirm some things.

50x16, 700x23, 90 RPM is 22.0mph. To you that's the "slow" part of the cassette. Is that climbing speed for you? Explain the logic of saying it adds cogs in the "slow" part of the cassette then going on to say the cogs added are 12t and 16t. That means 22.0mph is slow to you, right and I'm just putting words in your mouth, right? 22.0mph isn't part of the "faster" part of the cassette where "when wind drag plays a significant issue", right?

Or did you just say that it adds 12t and 16t for no particular reason in no relation to your other statements, and when half the added gears are apparently at the top end? What exactly are you trying to say?

Are you just trying to string together a bunch of nonsensical non-sequitur contradictory statements?

Explain it to me since apparently I'm an idiot that has no idea what you're actually saying.

Bike Gremlin

12 tooth cog is used only if you want to spin downhill, or on flats behind a bus using it's drag.

16 is not nearly as crucial as 15 and below. i've already explainef my point of view. i understand you don't agree.

2lo8

So 12t is the slower part of the cassette? Or did you contradict yourself? Am I doing something wrong by connecting your mention of the additional 12t and 16t cogs to your comment about it just adding cogs in the slower part of the cassette?

If you wanted to say 50x11, 50x12 aren't that useful, because you'd probably only use them spinning downhill or behind a bus, that's a more or less fair argument. But that's not what you said. Or at least, I didn't find that implied or clearly stated in your earlier posts. I personally like 9 speed because junior cassettes starting with 13t and 14t are cheap, riveted clusters, and you can have any size cog as your biggest cog unlike 10. Buying an 11-32 and an 11-34 will get you a huge range of cogs to pick from.

You didn't seem to imply in your statements that 16t not being useful was simply a matter of relative importance to 15t below. You seemed to imply 16t was not part of the part of the " 'faster' part of the cassette, when wind drag plays a significant issue, one tooth jumps are preferable". I otherwise can't make sense of the juxtaposition of the list of cogs and that statement. Okay, so 1t cogs are more important between 13t and 15t than 15t and 17t. Who said otherwise? Neither cassette is giving those up. The 13-14-15 progression is a given with either cassette. The only issue is if 16t is in the faster part of the cassette where drag makes a difference, this is really not a relative argument because there is no choice given in which you're picking between 13-14-15 and 15-16-17. The only thing in question is if 16t meets the threshold of drag mattering.

You do realize I'm debating some fairly specific points you seem to have implied, I'm not attacking 8 speed in general. I don't think it's necessary to make up false things in order to demonize 10 and 11 speeds and claim they don't work "OK"

Bike Gremlin

My point was that 10 speed, pre 4700 has flaws that make it less robust. 11 speed is better.

Tighter cog spacing than 8, 9 speed? Yes.
Less cable pulled for each gear change? Yes.
For those two reasons it is more sensitive to any misalignment, or cable/housing imperfections.

Does that bother all the 10 speed riders? I don't know.

It costs more? Yes.
It shifts quicker? Yes.
Tighter gearing - possible - depends on particular cassette choice. But it is relative whether one gains a lot by that - IMO it's mostly marketing. But I already said - for those who can't live without wide range of 1 tooth jumps - by all means go 11 speed. It shifts better than old 10 speed.

2lo8

Ok, so your point about it mostly adding cogs in the slower/faster whatever part of the cassette and needing special housing was gibberish. Glad we cleared that up, because the arguments you're making now don't appear to be the same ones you were making earlier.

Old 10 speed, including 5600/6600/7800, all SRAM 10 (3.1mm/gear) and all Campagnolo 10 (2.8mm/gear, also the oldest 10) shifted fine. Saying old 10 speed is still an over generalization. It's true that Shimano 10 (2.3mm/gear) is less than Shimano 11 (2.7mm/gear) making it more sensitive to cable friction, but the fact that 5600/6600/7800 had external cables greatly reduced friction in the first place. No small radius right angle S-bends at the bars. Both the SRAM and the Campagnolo have cable pull per shift at least as good as Shimano 8.

I'm still going to disagree with you. Only with 2nd generation Shimano 10 is where there was a problem, because it has the increased susceptibility to friction because of the 2.3mm/gear pull, and it had increased friction from under the tape cables. The friction from external cables to under the tape cables is not insignificant. It's that in combination with the pull ratio that causes the issue, not the pull ratio alone. Even then it still shifts fine.

Does bending a derailer hanger it bother the 10 speed riders? Apparently it bothers 7/8 speed users who don't use 10 speed and bend their hangers on a regular basis.

Obviously what cogs you have depend on cassette choice. If you don't want tightly spaced cogs, you can get a wider cassette. Compared to the 13-26 you chose, you still get to keep your 13-14-15, not only that, you get wider spaced cogs at the bottom end and lower climbing gears. Sure they're useless if you don't climb steep stuff. But it's not simply more cogs in the slow part of the cassette for racing, whatever that's supposed to mean, or tighter cogs for people that that want them, there's also the option of wider range.

12-13-14-15-17-19-22-25-28-32
vs
13-14-15-17-19-21-23-26

As far as cost goes, only the buyer can determine if having an extra cog is worth the cost.

Bike Gremlin

Are you trolling?

I'm talking about Shimano, pre 4700 road 10 speed. No other brand, no other system (their MTB 10 speed is better).

I've had slightly crash bent RD hangers straightened to limp home and 10 speed was very sensitive to any bend, while the lower the sprocket count, the better chances of making it work.

Had a hanger straightened at home, as good as it gets, and it still didn't work fine until a new one was put.


The issues that make 10 speed less tolerant of any flaw I've explained several times already.

My whole point was that Shimano 10 speed gains very little even compared to 8 speeds, definitely compared to OP's 9 speed. While it costs more and is less robust.


11 speed stuff still suffers from very tightly spaced sprockets, but the cable pull was made right, so one less problem (weakness).

joejack951

I've had the same experience with 8 speed. Sometimes a hanger just can't be straightened satisfactorily. Nothing to do with 10 speed.

I have an Ultegra 6500 bike with a 12/27 cassette and an Ultegra 6600 bike with a 12/27 cassette. Neither bike requires much maintenance relative to 8 speed bikes I've used previously but the 6600 bike is my best shifting bike (better than my 105 5800 bike). The rear derailleur shifts smoother under load than anything else I've ever used (note that my 5800 bike's front shifting is better but it is also a double, unlike the triples on both the Ultegra bikes). I don't have nearly as many miles on it at my 6500 bike so I can't make any grand claims about durability but even if it is 50% as durable I'm perfectly fine with that.

brianmcg123

big chainring 

For some historical perspective, Ray Booty broke the 4 hour/100 mile barrier in the 1950's. An English cyclist and time trial specialist, open road racing was banned in England at the time, Booty rode an 84 inch fixed gear for his 3 hour 58 min. record in the 100 mile TT. That's comparable to your 50 Χ 16 gear on the OP'S bike. That's some swift pedaling. Some TT competitions had a 78" gear resriction. 84" fixed gear was the standard back in the 1950's and many racers stuck with it well into the 1960's.