How many gear inches do you use?
11-29-06, 09:10 PM
#102
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Don't call it Beantown
Posts: 321
Bikes: Iro Mark V Fix and a 24" Nirve bmx
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I love the 46x17 (73") cause of the skid patches and I enjoy spinning. Gives me a 2.7 gain ratio.
11-30-06, 04:30 PM
#104
Ex-Lion Tamer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brooklyn, N.Y.
Posts: 1,152
Bikes: 1982 Lotus Legend (steel-frame touring bike); 1982 Fuji S10S (converted to a singlespeed: 46x16); Specialized Crossroads hybrid (the child taxi).
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
42x16 on 27" wheels for New York. (70.9 inches)
I find that on flats, I wish I had a taller gear, and on the bridges...I can't imagine a taller gear.
One question about chainrings: If you had a 52x20, or a 58x22 (!), those would also be about 70 inches. But wouldn't those be harder to get started from a stop? On the other hand, would they then be easier to pedal once you were up to speed?
I find that on flats, I wish I had a taller gear, and on the bridges...I can't imagine a taller gear.
One question about chainrings: If you had a 52x20, or a 58x22 (!), those would also be about 70 inches. But wouldn't those be harder to get started from a stop? On the other hand, would they then be easier to pedal once you were up to speed?
12-01-06, 05:37 AM
#105
Sir Fallalot
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,286
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
11 Posts
Originally Posted by dwainedibbly
Low 60s. I like to spin.
Interesting that nobody is mentioning crank arm length. I ride 165s.
Interesting that nobody is mentioning crank arm length. I ride 165s.
12-01-06, 06:38 AM
#106
Tinkerer since 1980
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 922
Bikes: Coppi racer, Old school BMX, some random a fixed wheel convertion
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Originally Posted by Bklyn
One question about chainrings: If you had a 52x20, or a 58x22 (!), those would also be about 70 inches. But wouldn't those be harder to get started from a stop? On the other hand, would they then be easier to pedal once you were up to speed?
12-01-06, 06:44 AM
#107
jack of one or two trades
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Suburbia, CT
Posts: 5,640
Bikes: Old-ass gearie hardtail MTB, fix-converted Centurion LeMans commuter, SS hardtail monster MTB
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bklyn
One question about chainrings: If you had a 52x20, or a 58x22 (!), those would also be about 70 inches. But wouldn't those be harder to get started from a stop? On the other hand, would they then be easier to pedal once you were up to speed?
12-01-06, 09:55 AM
#108
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Why do I get a different answer on the Sheldon Calculator? I run (now) a 48/18 with 700(27) wheels. The calc gives me 72 inches, but other posts with the same ratio say they are riding 70ish.. why the discrepency?
12-01-06, 10:27 AM
#109
Gone, but not forgotten
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Newtonville, Massachusetts
Posts: 2,301
Bikes: See: https://sheldonbrown.org/bicycles
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Originally Posted by gfrance
Why do I get a different answer on the Sheldon Calculator? I run (now) a 48/18 with 700(27) wheels. The calc gives me 72 inches, but other posts with the same ratio say they are riding 70ish.. why the discrepency?
If you select: 700 X 23 / 23-622 as the wheel size, it comes out to 70.1 inches. Lots of folks ride that size.
Sheldon "Numbers" Brown
Code:
+---------------------------------+ | If you understand everything, | | you must be misinformed. | | --Japanese Proverb | +---------------------------------+
12-01-06, 11:26 AM
#110
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Posts: 40,865
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Canyon Exceed, Specialized Transition, Ellsworth Roots, Ridley Excalibur
Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2952 Post(s)
Liked 3,106 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Originally Posted by dwainedibbly
Low 60s. I like to spin.
Interesting that nobody is mentioning crank arm length. I ride 165s.
Interesting that nobody is mentioning crank arm length. I ride 165s.
In any event, I ride 172.5 because that's the same as my geared road bikes. I get a little toe overlap at the stoplights, but nothing to fret over.
12-01-06, 01:31 PM
#111
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: northern Florida, USA
Posts: 778
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by wroomwroomoops
Nobody? I did.
I just changed from the 172.5s on my current bike to 165s (have always ridden 170s before this) and can really tell the difference. It's not a factor in gear-inch calcs, but it does affect how the gear ratio "feels" to the rider, so it seems applicable. I had considered going to a higher gear, but that plan is on the back burner now until I adjust.
12-02-06, 05:37 PM
#114
Geek Extraordinaire
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 1,769
Bikes: Bianchi Advantage Fixed Conversion; Specialized Stumpjumper FS Hardtail
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TheBrick
If it has the same ratio everything should be the same. You may beable to argue that because the chain is in contact with more teeth there whould be more frinction (from the side of the teeth), but the force is spread over more teeth and the chain is in a bigger arc so more efficent maybe? Should wear slower as there is less force on each tooth but every thing else should be the same.
There have been studies that show that efficiency starts to drop and drivetrain wear is worse if either the cog or chainring is under 21 teeth.
__________________
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
Sintesi Conversion Serotta Track
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
Sintesi Conversion Serotta Track
12-02-06, 11:40 PM
#115
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 110
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Almost all hills around me, and long ones at that. 68.2 is good for me now. I could even go lower. Hopefully I'll build some strength and be able to go a little higher. If I was where it was flat, I'd be a little higher than 68.2. (48 x 19).
