Who really likes 50-34?
#201
~>~
Nathan,
How very snide.
Although I do of course own a penny-farthing and a very nice unicycle it seems that you are implying Luddite tendencies to myself due to my considering the current crop of E-shifters somewhat less than optimal. A bit funny to me actually as I have over the last 40 years been an "early adopter" and promoter of a few cycling innovations. Here's a list in no particular order that bucked the cycling status quo:
Clipless Pedals
Hardshell Helmets
Dura-Ace Components
130 BCD/ 39T
Indexed Shifting
American Framesets
High Performance Clincher Wheel Sets
Cassette Gear Sets
Aero TT Bars
Aluminum Race Frames
Cyclo-Cross Racing
Moulded Saddles
Mountain Bike Racing
Cyclo Computers
Aero Brake Levers
Moulded Shoe Cleat Mounts
Synthetic Chamois
All of the above received a hearty "that's not how it's done" in the community but now they seem the obvious norm to those who weren't there and don't know the technical history of the sport. I've never jumped on the band wagon of the latest fad, and there have been lots of them that never went anywhere, just because it was new/cool and massively marketed. Successful innovation involves requirements planning, cost/benefit analysis, extensive field testing and sometimes several generations of design. Good mechanics are both skeptics and open minded, some find current fads amusing, the answer to the question that no one asked or simply overpriced Fred magnets. Some don't.
Must go adjust the spoon brake on the Penny-Farthing, good thing it's not hydraulic actuation.
-Bandera
How very snide.
Although I do of course own a penny-farthing and a very nice unicycle it seems that you are implying Luddite tendencies to myself due to my considering the current crop of E-shifters somewhat less than optimal. A bit funny to me actually as I have over the last 40 years been an "early adopter" and promoter of a few cycling innovations. Here's a list in no particular order that bucked the cycling status quo:
Clipless Pedals
Hardshell Helmets
Dura-Ace Components
130 BCD/ 39T
Indexed Shifting
American Framesets
High Performance Clincher Wheel Sets
Cassette Gear Sets
Aero TT Bars
Aluminum Race Frames
Cyclo-Cross Racing
Moulded Saddles
Mountain Bike Racing
Cyclo Computers
Aero Brake Levers
Moulded Shoe Cleat Mounts
Synthetic Chamois
All of the above received a hearty "that's not how it's done" in the community but now they seem the obvious norm to those who weren't there and don't know the technical history of the sport. I've never jumped on the band wagon of the latest fad, and there have been lots of them that never went anywhere, just because it was new/cool and massively marketed. Successful innovation involves requirements planning, cost/benefit analysis, extensive field testing and sometimes several generations of design. Good mechanics are both skeptics and open minded, some find current fads amusing, the answer to the question that no one asked or simply overpriced Fred magnets. Some don't.
Must go adjust the spoon brake on the Penny-Farthing, good thing it's not hydraulic actuation.
-Bandera
Last edited by Bandera; 05-23-13 at 06:35 AM. Reason: editing
#202
~>~
42/24
"For climbing, a narrow range of gearing was the norm, but also bigger gears than those used today. Eddy Merckx, for example, was a big fan of the 44-tooth chainring (typically paired with a 53) for climbing with a 6-speed freewheel 13-19; for particularly tough mountain races or stages he would opt for a 13-21.
By Hinault’s time, the chainring set-up was typically 53-42 with a 7-speed cluster. Hinault’s gear evolved from a low gear of a 42-22 to a 42-24 (47.3 inches compared to 45.8 inches for today’s popular 39×23) as he changed his climbing technique to focus more on seated efforts. As he said: “I sit further back and pedal more smoothly.”"
https://le-grimpeur.net/blog/archives/18
"For climbing, a narrow range of gearing was the norm, but also bigger gears than those used today. Eddy Merckx, for example, was a big fan of the 44-tooth chainring (typically paired with a 53) for climbing with a 6-speed freewheel 13-19; for particularly tough mountain races or stages he would opt for a 13-21.
By Hinault’s time, the chainring set-up was typically 53-42 with a 7-speed cluster. Hinault’s gear evolved from a low gear of a 42-22 to a 42-24 (47.3 inches compared to 45.8 inches for today’s popular 39×23) as he changed his climbing technique to focus more on seated efforts. As he said: “I sit further back and pedal more smoothly.”"
https://le-grimpeur.net/blog/archives/18
#203
commu*ist spy
someone brought up a good point. With a compact, most people would be able to use a fuller range of the cassette while on the big ring, and use the 34 as more of a bailout for really steep climbs.
#204
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: S-Works Roubaix SL2^H4, Secteur Sport, TriCross, Kaffenback, Lurcher 29er
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Unless something has changed with this new dark magic, big/big will create the same chainline on any drivetrain where the cassettes are the same width, regardless of cog count. I could be wrong.
I bet BDop could jump in here and blow our minds with drawings, graphs and anecdotes.
I bet BDop could jump in here and blow our minds with drawings, graphs and anecdotes.
Anyway, I don't worry my little head about cross-chaining. I don't do it that often, so I expect that the wear from normal riding will bring me to chain replacement long before any theoretical additional wear from cross-chaining.
#205
serious cyclist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 21,147
Bikes: S1, R2, P2
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9334 Post(s)
Liked 3,679 Times
in
2,026 Posts
That's exactly what I do - 50t with the 12-27 covers most things, and I drop to the 36t for nasty climbs.
#206
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: S-Works Roubaix SL2^H4, Secteur Sport, TriCross, Kaffenback, Lurcher 29er
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
42/24
"For climbing, a narrow range of gearing was the norm, but also bigger gears than those used today. Eddy Merckx, for example, was a big fan of the 44-tooth chainring (typically paired with a 53) for climbing with a 6-speed freewheel 13-19; for particularly tough mountain races or stages he would opt for a 13-21.
By Hinault’s time, the chainring set-up was typically 53-42 with a 7-speed cluster. Hinault’s gear evolved from a low gear of a 42-22 to a 42-24 (47.3 inches compared to 45.8 inches for today’s popular 39×23) as he changed his climbing technique to focus more on seated efforts. As he said: “I sit further back and pedal more smoothly.”"
https://le-grimpeur.net/blog/archives/18
"For climbing, a narrow range of gearing was the norm, but also bigger gears than those used today. Eddy Merckx, for example, was a big fan of the 44-tooth chainring (typically paired with a 53) for climbing with a 6-speed freewheel 13-19; for particularly tough mountain races or stages he would opt for a 13-21.
By Hinault’s time, the chainring set-up was typically 53-42 with a 7-speed cluster. Hinault’s gear evolved from a low gear of a 42-22 to a 42-24 (47.3 inches compared to 45.8 inches for today’s popular 39×23) as he changed his climbing technique to focus more on seated efforts. As he said: “I sit further back and pedal more smoothly.”"
https://le-grimpeur.net/blog/archives/18
#207
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Posts: 4,394
Bikes: '80 Masi Gran Criterium, '12 Trek Madone, early '60s Frejus track
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 514 Post(s)
Liked 448 Times
in
337 Posts
Not too often, but with 9 other cogs on board it isn't like the 11 is taking up too much space. If I wasn't living and riding in Colorado, 50/12 would be plenty.
#208
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
It's silly how people equate standard gearing to stronger riders, some people are more comfortable spinning a lower gear than trying to grind through a hill with a only a 23, if you spin at a higher cadence, you can go just as fast as someone on a harder gear.
#209
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Not really. When you consider how much many people spend on bikes, a bit more wear and tear is no big deal.
A better reason not to cross chain is that it limits your ability to shift to an optimum gear. I see people riding in the bottom two cogs on the big ring all the time. Except when you have reason to believe that you'll only want to upshift, that's just not a great idea. Being in the top cog in the small ring is also not great for the same reason, though I see that less frequently.
A better reason not to cross chain is that it limits your ability to shift to an optimum gear. I see people riding in the bottom two cogs on the big ring all the time. Except when you have reason to believe that you'll only want to upshift, that's just not a great idea. Being in the top cog in the small ring is also not great for the same reason, though I see that less frequently.
+1. Way to many folks ride almost exclusively on the big ring for whatever reason - machismo - I don't know. When I ride with folks like that, I do a quick mental calculations and figure at the speed we're travelling they can't be turning the cranks faster than 60 RPM. That's not good.
#210
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Posts: 4,394
Bikes: '80 Masi Gran Criterium, '12 Trek Madone, early '60s Frejus track
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 514 Post(s)
Liked 448 Times
in
337 Posts
By today's standards we were all hopelessly over-geared at the low end.
#211
Senior Member
#212
commu*ist spy
I feel like I'm missing something... Why is riding a 52 correlated with lower cadence at all? The only difference between them is 1 extra gear on both ends of the spectrum. Everything in the middle is comparable. A quick Excel table shows you nothing about having to pedal at a lower cadence with a 52 (didn't include small chainring for simplicity's sake). just click up 1 gear with a 50 and you'll get the same thing.
[TABLE="width: 704"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 64"][/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]11[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]12[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]13[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]14[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]15[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]16[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]18[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]20[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]22[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]24[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]52[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.5[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.4[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]50[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.5[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.8[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.8[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.5[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.1[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
It's not very complicated.
[TABLE="width: 704"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 64"][/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]11[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]12[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]13[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]14[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]15[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]16[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]18[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]20[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]22[/TD]
[TD="width: 64, align: right"]24[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]52[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.0[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.7[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.5[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.9[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.4[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"]50[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.5[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]4.2[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.8[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.6[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]3.1[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.8[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.5[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.3[/TD]
[TD="class: xl63, align: right"]2.1[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
It's not very complicated.
#213
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 3,078
Bikes: Roubaix SL4 Expert , Cervelo S2
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 85 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
A standard crank is going to be different since the 39T small ring is usable up to a higher speed.
Last edited by Dunbar; 05-22-13 at 11:18 PM.
#214
Voice of the Industry
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
I think this is a great point. A fuller range cassette also is more forgiving to say using a 50/38 compact like I do...makes the 50 more usable and the 38 is more usable with bigger cogs in back. The downside of more of a pie plate cassette of course is loss of tight cog spacing shift to shift. To me, since there is no gearing utopia, give up of slight tight gear spacing in back is better than the less tolerant 50/34 gap in front shifting which I never liked.
#215
Voice of the Industry
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
Unless you can spot the difference between a standard and compact crank I don't think you can do accurate mental calculations. The reason I leave my compact on the big ring most of the time is purely functional. The small ring is pretty much "spun out" at about 18-20mph which is precisely where road cyclists spend a lot of time (at or above.) I can't believe riding around on the small-small (or second to last cog) is good for the drivetrain either. The big ring on a compact is completely usable down to about 14mph IME and that's staying off the bottom three cogs to avoid cross-chaining. And lastly, who wants to constantly be shifting the front rings if it can be avoided?
A standard crank is going to be different since the 39T small ring is usable up to a higher speed.
A standard crank is going to be different since the 39T small ring is usable up to a higher speed.
#216
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northern Ontario
Posts: 3,659
Bikes: Colnago Master XL, Bianchi Via Nirone 7, Marinoni Fango
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I think this is a great point. A fuller range cassette also is more forgiving to say using a 50/38 compact like I do...makes the 50 more usable and the 38 is more usable with bigger cogs in back. The downside of more of a pie plate cassette of course is loss of tight cog spacing shift to shift. To me, since there is no gearing utopia, give up of slight tight gear spacing in back is better than the less tolerant 50/34 gap in front shifting which I never liked.
#217
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Unless you can spot the difference between a standard and compact crank I don't think you can do accurate mental calculations. The reason I leave my compact on the big ring most of the time is purely functional. The small ring is pretty much "spun out" at about 18-20mph which is precisely where road cyclists spend a lot of time (at or above.) I can't believe riding around on the small-small (or second to last cog) is good for the drivetrain either. The big ring on a compact is completely usable down to about 14mph IME and that's staying off the bottom three cogs to avoid cross-chaining. And lastly, who wants to constantly be shifting the front rings if it can be avoided?
A standard crank is going to be different since the 39T small ring is usable up to a higher speed.
A standard crank is going to be different since the 39T small ring is usable up to a higher speed.
#218
The Weird Beard
Join Date: May 2005
Location: COS
Posts: 8,554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
People bring up cable failures due to arguments that assume mechanical systems are perfection incarnate and never ever have any issues at all, while electronic systems are likely to explode at any moment.
Cables fail. Not very often, but it happens. But you know what also almost never happens? Di2 failures. And you don't even have to replace most of the system every 6 months to get that reliability.
Cables fail. Not very often, but it happens. But you know what also almost never happens? Di2 failures. And you don't even have to replace most of the system every 6 months to get that reliability.
Would you trust electronic braking? I certainly would not.
#220
Banned.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 359
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
A bit of an aside but since were talking about Koolaid i figure it's ok:
Man, that new DA 9000 11 speed chain shifts better and runs quieter on my ten-speed system than anything I've ever seen.
Man, that new DA 9000 11 speed chain shifts better and runs quieter on my ten-speed system than anything I've ever seen.
#221
serious cyclist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 21,147
Bikes: S1, R2, P2
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9334 Post(s)
Liked 3,679 Times
in
2,026 Posts
I feel like I'm missing something... Why is riding a 52 correlated with lower cadence at all? The only difference between them is 1 extra gear on both ends of the spectrum. Everything in the middle is comparable. A quick Excel table shows you nothing about having to pedal at a lower cadence with a 52 (didn't include small chainring for simplicity's sake). just click up 1 gear with a 50 and you'll get the same thing.
It's not very complicated.
It's not very complicated.
However, your point is also damning to the "deferred success gearing" crowd. A compact is just another gear or two at the low end. If you use it with a smaller cassette, or don't usually drop to your biggest cog or two... it's like running a standard with a bigger cassette or using the biggest cogs. Gear-inches are gear-inches, and you don't go slower because you use one method of getting there vs another.
#223
serious cyclist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 21,147
Bikes: S1, R2, P2
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9334 Post(s)
Liked 3,679 Times
in
2,026 Posts
This is just more Kool-Aid. Cables do fail, but under extreme circumstances. I can only base this on the extremely sparse volume of cable-breaking threads in the history of this forum, and my personal experience, which features no cables breaking.
Would you trust electronic braking? I certainly would not.
Would you trust electronic braking? I certainly would not.
#224
The Weird Beard
Join Date: May 2005
Location: COS
Posts: 8,554
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
FWIW, after stupidly trying to adjust a 2x9 lever to a triple crank yesterday (I had forgotten the levers were not 3x), I had to tune out the 30t to make it work, and work it did. 42t even around here is plenty with a 12-27.
Why not 53/42 with a 14-25 in the back for 9 speed?
Why not 53/42 with a 14-25 in the back for 9 speed?
#225
serious cyclist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 21,147
Bikes: S1, R2, P2
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9334 Post(s)
Liked 3,679 Times
in
2,026 Posts