Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Road Cycling (http://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/)
-   -   How do we press the big three to offer 13t smallest cog cassettes? (http://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/949112-how-do-we-press-big-three-offer-13t-smallest-cog-cassettes.html)

redlude97 05-20-14 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpenmanparker (Post 16775215)
Sorry I didn't get that. I would rather buy a new cassette than a new crank.

I guess your original post doesn't make sense then. The "common folk" don't usually need a regular double crank, which is why compact cranks are so popular nowadays. So again I'll ask if the biggest gear you'll ever need is 53x13 why have a 53 to start with?

Weatherby 05-20-14 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redlude97 (Post 16775959)
I guess your original post doesn't make sense then. The "common folk" don't usually need a regular double crank, which is why compact cranks are so popular nowadays. So again I'll ask if the biggest gear you'll ever need is 53x13 why have a 53 to start with?

Because that is what he has. What is so mysterious. Compacts are relatively recent items.

What is mysterious to me is why you think 53x13 is remotely equivalent to a 50x11 that is standard with 11s cassettes. Do the math.

SRAM, Shimano, and Campy do not make road bike gear ratios that fit many cyclist's needs. There is not a single 11s cassette on the market that meets my needs in conjunction with my compact crank. I never need the 11 or 12 cog and a couple hundred miles into a long ride, something more than 28 teeth might be nice on a 16% gradient.

13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 25, 28, 32 would be be better overall for many riders.

Leinster 05-20-14 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadandmountain (Post 16775783)
Component companies want to standardize 50/34 and don't want to produce 53/39 anymore.

Except their pro teams want 53, 54 and 55, so they'll just have to keep producing them for the top end, won't they? Unless they start making 10t rears.

banerjek 05-20-14 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Weatherby (Post 16776084)
SRAM, Shimano, and Campy do not make road bike gear ratios that fit many cyclist's needs. There is not a single 11s cassette on the market that meets my needs in conjunction with my compact crank. I never need the 11 or 12 cog and a couple hundred miles into a long ride, something more than 28 teeth might be nice on a 16% gradient.

13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 25, 28, 32 would be be better overall for many riders.

Sure, but triples also make loads of sense for many riders but not enough people are interested in buying them.

It's easy to get any gear ratio you want with existing cassettes -- that's what different ring sizes are for. 34/32 doesn't give you enough low end and not willing to get a triple? No problem, get a variable bolt crank (SRAM, Campy, and Shimano are not the only outfits that can put out decent product) and put any ring you want down to 24T. That will get you crazy low end you couldn't even match with a 36 tooth pie plate that weighs a ton in the rear.

The only reason people have any problems with gearing at all is either lack of awareness of options or insistence on using at least one component that is inappropriate.

Bandera 05-20-14 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpenmanparker (Post 16774971)
cassettes with 13t smallest cogs would be a tremendous boon to many riders running 53/39 chain rings. So

how do we make this happen?

Shimano 6600 10 Speed "Junior" cassettes 13-25 are still available, works a treat w/ 6700 kit on my 53/39 Vitus .
I have one tucked away for the 52/39/30 triple going onto my Rando-ish build as well.

-Bandera

cellery 05-20-14 03:05 PM

Wouldn't it just be easier to put a smaller outside chainwheel on? They do make 48t, 46t, etc cranksets.

zymphad 05-20-14 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bandera (Post 16776172)
Shimano 6600 10 Speed "Junior" cassettes 13-25 are still available, works a treat w/ 6700 kit on my 53/39 Vitus .
I have one tucked away for the 52/39/30 triple going onto my Rando-ish build as well.

-Bandera

Nice option.

Also curious about providing more options like this since it seems spinning fast 90-120 is becoming the rage as some are pointing to the pros who do/did it. Lance/Wiggins/Froume being the top names for spinning fast on mountains or flats. Though they are the three big dopers, so eh, maybe bad examples.

How many people outside of UCI pros can spin 100 on 50/11?

rpenmanparker 05-20-14 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Weatherby (Post 16776084)
Because that is what he has. What is so mysterious. Compacts are relatively recent items.

What is mysterious to me is why you think 53x13 is remotely equivalent to a 50x11 that is standard with 11s cassettes. Do the math.

SRAM, Shimano, and Campy do not make road bike gear ratios that fit many cyclist's needs. There is not a single 11s cassette on the market that meets my needs in conjunction with my compact crank. I never need the 11 or 12 cog and a couple hundred miles into a long ride, something more than 28 teeth might be nice on a 16% gradient.

13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 25, 28, 32 would be be better overall for many riders.

That's what I'm talkin' about. Someone gets it.

rpenmanparker 05-20-14 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banerjek (Post 16776158)
Sure, but triples also make loads of sense for many riders but not enough people are interested in buying them.

It's easy to get any gear ratio you want with existing cassettes -- that's what different ring sizes are for. 34/32 doesn't give you enough low end and not willing to get a triple? No problem, get a variable bolt crank (SRAM, Campy, and Shimano are not the only outfits that can put out decent product) and put any ring you want down to 24T. That will get you crazy low end you couldn't even match with a 36 tooth pie plate that weighs a ton in the rear.

The only reason people have any problems with gearing at all is either lack of awareness of options or insistence on using at least one component that is inappropriate.

The 53/39 spread is more attractive to me than 50/34. As for a triple, I have no use for more rings up front. Hey, everybody has preferences, yours, mine, ours. I'm glad you like triples. I'm just asking for mine (and lots of other folks') to be addressed by the equipment suppliers.

rpenmanparker 05-20-14 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cellery (Post 16776223)
Wouldn't it just be easier to put a smaller outside chainwheel on? They do make 48t, 46t, etc cranksets.

IMO the spread between 53 and 39 is just about ideal, given the right cassette of course.

zymphad 05-20-14 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpenmanparker (Post 16776264)
That's what I'm talkin' about. Someone gets it.

200 miles at 16% gradient? Pass.

Drew Eckhardt 05-20-14 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cellery (Post 16776223)
Wouldn't it just be easier to put a smaller outside chainwheel on? They do make 48t, 46t, etc cranksets.

Switching the big ring to a 48, 46, etc. won't get you back the 18 or 16 cog which was omitted to make room for the 12 on the small end.

Elvo 05-20-14 03:45 PM

Shimano CS-6600 Wide 10 Speed Cassette - Normal Shipping Ground

Bandera 05-20-14 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zymphad (Post 16776226)
it seems spinning fast 90-120 is becoming the rage

It's been the rage my whole cycling career as developing a powerful high cadence pedaling style with grunt on demand was what our coaches emphasized 40 years ago. Modern wide-range gearing gives tight ratios for efficiency and low range for climbing, it was one or the other "back when". 13T top cogs w/ 53 or 52 big-rings still get it for me, and give nice tight steps below, but I'm just an elderly fellow plootering about.....

-Bandera

gc3 05-20-14 04:05 PM

As in all things...money talks & bullsh*t walks. It's a marketplace, what is desired is what gets provided.

zymphad 05-20-14 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gc3 (Post 16776400)
As in all things...money talks & bullsh*t walks. It's a marketplace, what is desired is what gets provided.

If money talks and the only options are 11-28/12-25 etc, then what does customer do, not buy anything?

Bandera 05-20-14 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gc3 (Post 16776400)
As in all things...money talks & bullsh*t walks. It's a marketplace, what is desired is what gets provided.


It's a fashion driven industry, fantasy gearing for the 11 cog 60RPM crowd at Starbucks.

-Bandera

caloso 05-20-14 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elvo (Post 16776344)

I was just about to post this. As the dad of a new junior racer, I have scoped out all the junior cassettes.

banerjek 05-20-14 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpenmanparker (Post 16776276)
The 53/39 spread is more attractive to me than 50/34. As for a triple, I have no use for more rings up front. Hey, everybody has preferences, yours, mine, ours. I'm glad you like triples. I'm just asking for mine (and lots of other folks') to be addressed by the equipment suppliers.

I like triples, but I don't actually use them except on my 'bents. I agree that the 50/34 spread is wide and consider that a climbing setup -- if you're not on long really steep climbs or in gale force winds, the 34 is ridiculous.

But if you need the type of gearing that you'd get with a smaller 13T, all you need to do is get the rings that functionally move everything down. 48 and 46T big rings make a lot of sense for many people, and you can run them with very tight gear ratios that overlap.

One thing I don't understand is why people constantly worry about their big ring not being big enough. Except for people who race and put out massive power, this is a total nonissue. Even with 46T, spinout is around 40mph. When you get to speeds like that, it's all about aero and typically a hill...

The reality is that most people don't fool with their gearing. They buy what they see others using that looks cool. I totally get the idea that it would be nice to have suppliers make what people want -- if I had my way, I'd have them make the good stuff in 9 speed. Less finicky, better in slop, better master link options, and cheaper.

rpenmanparker 05-20-14 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gc3 (Post 16776400)
As in all things...money talks & bullsh*t walks. It's a marketplace, what is desired is what gets provided.

Of course you're right, but it is more and more common for the supplier to predetermine what the consumer will want by limiting the choices. Self-fulfilling prophecy. "Aha! See, I told you they want 11t and 12t cassettes," he says. He forgets to mention that is all that was offered.

Leinster 05-20-14 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew Eckhardt (Post 16776333)
Switching the big ring to a 48, 46, etc. won't get you back the 18 or 16 cog which was omitted to make room for the 12 on the small end.

52x16 is right in between the 14 and 15 on both a 46 and 48. Both of which you will have. Switching out the 12 is sacrificing top end to gain options in the middle, which is exactly what happens either way.

gc3 05-20-14 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpenmanparker (Post 16776460)
Of course you're right, but it is more and more common for the supplier to predetermine what the consumer will want by limiting the choices. Self-fulfilling prophecy. "Aha! See, I told you they want 11t and 12t cassettes," he says. He forgets to mention that is all that was offered.

not disagreeing the supplier influences demand in the ways that best serve their revenue-inducing purpose, but hey, what's good for him is good for the majority of us....

Quote:

Originally Posted by zymphad (Post 16776420)
If money talks and the only options are 11-28/12-25 etc, then what does customer do, not buy anything?

or build your own...or find a boutique supplier that will cater and price to the smaller market....or start a campaign such as inferred by this thread...

rpenmanparker 05-20-14 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leinster (Post 16776477)
52x16 is right in between the 14 and 15 on both a 46 and 48. Both of which you will have. Switching out the 12 is sacrificing top end to gain options in the middle, which is exactly what happens either way.

Yes, either way. Why is the change at the crank better than the easier and cheaper change at the cassette?

rpenmanparker 05-20-14 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gc3 (Post 16776523)
not disagreeing the supplier influences demand in the ways that best serve their revenue-inducing purpose, but hey, what's good for him is good for the majority of us....



or build your own...or find a boutique supplier that will cater and price to the smaller market....or start a campaign such as inferred by this thread...

Oh sh*t, did I just start a campaign? That is heavy duty (as we used to say back in the day). I was just trolling. ;)

gc3 05-20-14 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpenmanparker (Post 16776544)
Oh sh*t, did I just start a campaign? That is heavy duty (as we used to say back in the day).

how could you not? it's in your sig...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:18 PM.