Or to summarize, HTFU and spin.

If you can! I can't, not while climbing. Taller gearing works just fine for me.

Expanding on this somewhat... I'm going with a from scratch build because of material choice, build flexibility, and cost - While I can afford a ridiculously expensive bike, I can't yet justify it to myself.

Just be aware that, from a racing standpoint, you are sacrificing quite a bit by going with steel over carbon...

The division is over Big External Cleats, that you cannot walk on Long, and have it Damaged.

Racing You will stop and take off your shoes , right after then

Vs the recessed cleat that you can. touring and commuting may favor that,..

Time ATAC SPuD, are supported by QBP stocking small replacement parts..

Frame builders :
Down there you have Bernie Mikkelson building frames , and Brent Steelman
on the other side of the bay, and Bruce Gordon In Petaluma , etc.

I use a 53/39, with cassette's ranging from 11-28 to 12-23. Just switched to 11-25 from 12-25 for my default racing setup. I rarely need more than a 39-23 combo, but there are a couple of climbs where I need the 25, and one where I need the 28 and still just barely make it. But none of our races put me into anything bigger than a 25, and if I'm not on top of that, I'm out of the race. I am frequently in the 53-11, and often spin that out: our Saturday team ride includes a 40+ downhill. We don't have a lot of true "cols" here, but there are a lot of gentler climbs, and a typical Saturday ride will have 3-4K of elevation gain. 50/34 has me shifting the rings way too much: my sweet spot straddles the two rings.

If I can get to the point where that is the differentiating factor in my racing, I'll be more than happy to N+1.

Isn't that terrain / race dependent? (although that has been one of the surprises for me on the Fuji - I'm spending alot more time on the big ring than I used to).

Am I correct in asserting that pinning your sweet spot down is pretty crucial and that it will move up with fitness? It certainly has been the case for me so far.

That's what I run on my training and climbing bikes, only with an 11/27 in the back.

This and AZT's post raise the question (heading off topic...) of gear selections - when racing do you avoid cross-chaining or not?

Most of the time yes. Sometimes no if I know I'm going to run out of gear on the small ring.

And this is another beauty of electric shifting...the front derailleurs automatically adjust so there's no rub.

So... (just trying to get my head around this), the difference between 12-25 and 12-28 (using SRAM cassettes, for example) is just in the 3 biggest sprockets,
so typically only climbing? e.g.: 34x21/23/25 vs 34x22/25/28? Or will you run with the 50x21 or 50x22 or even 50x23 or 50x25 as needed?

Hi Esteban58, I'll weigh in on several of your topics. I'm kind of surprised to see so many Look users here. Just by observation, I'd say about 50% of my club members use Speedplay. I have used Look since they succeeded in marketing the clipless pedal in the 1980s. I have a love-hate relationship with Kéo pedals. I like how they feel under my foot and I like their light weight, however, I continue to have problems engaging them. At this point I know my problems are as much mental as physical but Tuesday's ride was especially bad. My start line paranoia about clipping in needs to get better this year, not worse.

Are you familiar with the term 'money-pit?' That's apt for bike racing. Equipment is just a part of it. The bike racing part of my stable is:

• A road bike for training and mid-week training races (medium weight, built for reliability)
• A road bike for "real" races (light weight)
• A TT bike
• A track bike (mostly for training and occasional races)

I understand your stated reasons for buying a custom frame but as AzTR mentioned you can get more performance (primarily weight and stiffness) out of a stock frame for the same price. Buy a stock frameset and put whatever you want on it. That's what I almost always do. All of my race bikes are built up from buying bare frames, except the Shiv TT bike which is only sold as a "module." Often there are great deals on complete bikes but as you said, I generally want more flexibility in deciding what I want on a bike --especially the contact points. As Racer Ex mentioned, I too have the same contact points (saddle, pedals, handlebars, and shifters) on my road bikes. My track bike has the same pedals and saddle (though your mileage will really vary on track bike saddles) and my TT bike has the same pedals.

All of the road oriented bikes have Campagnolo Record-10 components. I have a number of wheelsets and cassettes and I don't want to have to think about which ones work with which bike. I change cassettes like most people change underwear as I want to have the most appropriate gearing for the kind of race or training ride that I'm doing. Regarding gearing and races, to a degree you need to be strong enough to climb in higher gears as Hermes mentions. For most long climbs in road races, if you are in something smaller than a 39 X 25 you'll get dropped anyway. Yes, I've been passed by some guys who can spin a small gear like crazy but they are the exception (and you might be too). Check speed vs cadence for various gear inches. Having seen Racer Ex climb, I wonder when he uses a 34 X 27?

Also, for criteriums you'll want something like a 21 or 23 max cog. Anything larger is just dead weight since you'll never use it. If a course has a short, steep hill then having a 23 cog will let you sprint up the hill in a 53 X 21. If the course is flat then a standard 11-21 is best. Of course you'll only use a few of those gears in a flat crit.

Shifting technique in a races is usually stay in one chainring until you run out gears then shift to the other chainring. Folks that do heavy touring will try to make sure that they don't have gear overlap. Racers mostly need to worry about the lowest and highest gears that they'll need. Cross-chaining is for emergencies, not desired but if absolutely needed then do it.

Does electronic shifting allow cross-chaining?

Lots of thoughtful info - thanks.

I'm just filling in slot 1 right now (training bike, built for reliability) but I'm also wanting it to be useful long term for longer rides.

The steel framemakers union claim that they can make a bike as light and stiff as any carbon frame. I'm not in a position to argue this either way, but read the R&E Cycles manifesto
if you're interested.

And, at this point I'm committed to the build, so I guess I'll learn to post questions like this earlier in the future

On the pedals, at this point (given pricing, etc.) I think I'll give the Look pedals a try - if that doesn't work out, Speedplay will be the next stop - it sounds like one of the reasons there are so many choices is that there is a broad spectrum of needs. Balkanization comes to mind.

As for Campagnolo - any particular reason for going there? and do you use their wireless gear?

thanks,

Steve

I wonder when Ex needs that 34 at all... but the guys using compacts here tend to spend a fair amount of time at the track, developing that fast cadence. I climb at 80-100, and am rarely above 110.

He pulled away from me on the steep section of Hamilton I didn't have a chance to see what ring or cog he was in. Big and small would be my guess.

I climb at 60. Never higher.

Steve - I have two steel bikes, and I dearly love them, but I won't ride them in the rain. Water gets inside the frame tubes and causes rust unless you thoroughly drain it immediately after the ride. Of course, if the guy you're working with is comfortable with stainless, that would eliminate much (not all) of that worry. Make sure he coats the insides with Framesaver - there's a good chance he does this anyway.

If you can afford it, I'd consider also getting an aluminum frame bike with a mid-level group like 105. Aluminum bikes are pretty much impervious to climate-induced problems, though the tubes don't take well to direct impacts. You don't need an über-cool wheelset for these, just something decent. Getting something that takes fenders would be a plus.

Reasons for Campy: Mostly, it has to do with the way the hoods fit your hands - many folks think they're the most comfortable shifters to ride on the hoods. They function extremely well, too. I have an older eight speed setup, and I like the way it shifts from the drops better than I do Shimano.

Thanks Chuck. I do have an aluminum bike... my hybrid - its a great training bike (pushing that 30-ish pounds up hill is a real workout).

One issue I'm definitely facing is lack of experience with the components - but its not like you can just go in and buy one of each to try them out.

If someone makes a sub 900 gram steel frame, I haven't seen it. Since steel has isotropic material properties (roughly the same strength in all directions) you can't optimize frame stiffness as you can with multi-directional carbon layups. Not saying that you can't ride fast on a steel bike -- a lot of people can ride steel bikes faster than I can ride a carbon bike -- it's just that for racing, you can optimize frame design better with carbon. Regardless, a custom steel frame should be a joy to ride. I spent over 20 years racing on steel frames and less than 10 years on carbon frames. Had some aluminum and titanium frames in between. I've liked most of them. I like carbon better.

A couple of my reasons for Campagnolo instead of Shimano are no longer valid. First was the exposed shift cables instead of cables under the handlebar tape. New Shimano levers don't have exposed shift cables. I also didn't like the shape of the original levers and several generations of descendants. The current levers feel a lot better to me. YMMV.

Next, I didn't like the feel or the idea of brake levers serving two purposes, braking and shifting. I've had extended test rides and rentals of Shimano bikes (about 5 days total) and I didn't like the feel of the brake levers. Also, as smooth and light as Shimano shifting is, I like the more "purposeful" feel of Campy shifting. I also like the quick release for the brakes being built into the brake lever instead of the brake caliper. On the rare occasions when I break a spoke you don't diminish braking power when you open the quick release on the brake lever as you do when it's on the brake caliper. All of these still exist in Shimano but obviously many people are fine with this.

It comes down to a lot of personal taste. I'm still using 10-speed Campagnolo because I like it and because of my investment in cassettes and wheels and the number of bikes that I would have to outfit with new drivetrains. I'm not convinced that 11 is one better than 10 either. I am seriously considering SRAM when my components start wearing out but that is still a few years away and who knows what the component landscape will look like by then.

Electronic shifting? Maybe, but definitely not before I wear out what I have. I'd definitely have to look at cost of electronic vs mechanical when outfitting three bikes.

Steve - I was referring to a standard road bike, rather than a hybrid. Few people choose one as a primary race bike nowadays, though one specific model - Cannondale's CAAD series, currently at CAAD10 - is still considered an excellent race bike, at a couple thousand dollars under a comparably equipped carbon bike, and Specialized almost came out with an S-Works (factory racing) version of the Allez this year. Jamis and BMC also offer aluminum racing-specific bikes, and almost all other companies offer aluminum road bikes. My mutt build is on a 2009 CAAD9 frameset, and I'd race it in a heartbeat.

I don't worry too much about ratio numbers. I do avoid cross chaining. If I need to shift down to the small ring or up to the big one, I will. If I can't/can rotate the ratio I have selected, I change up or down on the back. It's tactile, not a thought process, IMHO.

My thoughts on Campagnolo vs. Shimano. Cleave certainly said it well. I will add that the "purposeful" feel of a Campy shift has a reassuring nature to it, and the group does shift fast and positively. It also allows a finer degree of trimming than (Ultegra) Shimano seems to. I have grown to really appreciate the control layout of Campagnolo. Some would argue that you need to remove your hand from a drop to actuate an up shift (it's done with a thumb lever), but I'll argue that I have to with the Shimano up shift, too. The brake levers on Campy are brake levers only, and as Cleave said, the brakes have a wonderful feel, they really give good feedback, and they're quite powerful. And then there is the marvelous workmanship on the Campagnolo parts. They are crafted, not manufactured. They are beautiful to behold, much like aircraft parts. I really appreciate that!

Standards are supposed to be for the cool kids, while compacts are for noobs

Your perspective is interesting - thanks. I like my compact, and agree that it provides the flexibility to simply change out cassettes to suit the ride. My daily rider has an 11/28, and in this hilly area, I use all of those gears - though I definitely miss the finer adjustments I'd get from a closer ration cassette.

Sorry to be late to this party, but there are variations on the compact theme. I never really liked the 50/34 setup I had, the drop to the small ring seemed too big and led to a lot of double ot treble shifting and often I'd feel I couldn't quite find the perfect gear. So I have moved to a 50/36. I find it much superior, giving me all the help I need in the hills with a similar "feel" to a standard setup.

I run a 12/25 on the back. There isn't much I can't get up in a 36/25, though there's a Vuelta Cat2 climb close to where I'm staying in Spain and to say I can spin up it would be an exaggeration.

As for pedals, I've never bothered to change from SPD SLs. They work for me.

Somewhat agree... which is why if I only had one road bike, I'd be extremely drawn to the new Dura Ace 52/36. With the luxury of two road bikes, I am quite fond of 50/34 on my climbing bike. I am in 34x25 a LOT... not because there is really many steep climbs, but on the long climbing rides, I'm much better off spinning than grinding.

I'm the opposite. Both ends of the cassette are more important to me than the middle. That discussion is usually about the biggest cog needed, but the 11t is pretty critical, in my opinion, even for a non-sprinter like myself. a) when I'm on the compact, it usually means climbing... which usually means a descent... and on a 50t chainring, you will want every last gear inch in back you can get. b) on a standard, it is obviously pretty important in a finishing sprint or big descent, but even in fast paceline, with a tailwind or a slight downhill, I find myself in 11 enough that it is easily warrants sacrificing a middle cog.

That's my thinking, Vance. I've discovered that I can climb with a standard 53-39 with a 13-26. By that twisted logic, I'm sure I can climb with a compact/11-25. I descend better than I climb, by a lot. I feel I'm playing to my strength by going the way you do.