Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Singlespeed & Fixed Gear "I still feel that variable gears are only for people over forty-five. Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles than by the artifice of a derailer? We are getting soft...As for me, give me a fixed gear!"-- Henri Desgrange (31 January 1865 - 16 August 1940)

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-19-07, 02:50 AM   #1
Sincitycycler
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Sincitycycler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: "Gosh honey, you pass more like Tony Rominger..."
Bikes: 2005 Scott CR1 Pro - 1992 Panasonix Fixed Conversion 60tx20t
Posts: 3,219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Is there an advantage to using a big chainring in front vs. small?

Say a 50x18 instead of a 44x16 even though they are pretty similar gear inches?
__________________
"How did all those 'Keep Off the Grass' signs get there?"

Last edited by Sincitycycler; 05-19-07 at 09:28 PM.
Sincitycycler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 02:57 AM   #2
jacobpriest
shadybikes
 
jacobpriest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Waco/Plano/Dallas/Brooklyn, Texas
Bikes:
Posts: 1,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
its actuallly better to use the smaller as far as effort goes.
jacobpriest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 09:00 AM   #3
lyledriver
Electrical Hazard
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Manhattan / Vancouver
Bikes: a bunch.
Posts: 974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
From the chain's point of view, its better to be layed out over more teeth.
lyledriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 10:06 AM   #4
baxtefer
Cornucopia of Awesomeness
 
baxtefer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: not where i used to be
Bikes:
Posts: 4,847
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wouldn't exactly call 73 vs. 68 GI "pretty similar".
baxtefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 10:10 AM   #5
thenewblk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 201
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
badassness?
thenewblk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 10:21 AM   #6
mander
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Van BC
Bikes:
Posts: 3,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Depending on your frame bigger rings may not clear the chainstay. Other than that, and other things being equal, i think bigger is better for the reason given by lyledriver. I think as jacobpriest says there is a belief among track racers that smaller rings and cogs are quicker or easier or something than bigger pairings with equivalent mechanical advantage. However, I suspect this is one of the many old wives tales of cycling, ie something that everyone repeats but that probably wouldnt stand up to serious testing.
mander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 10:25 AM   #7
thurstonboise
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Boise, Idyho
Bikes: '04 fisher 29er, NYC Bikes CityFixed
Posts: 676
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Gear inches are gear inches are gear inches. Can you feel a difference between 72" with a 52T chainring over a 42T? I doubt it. There might be a bit longer chainlife with a bigger setup because the chain doesn't bend as much wrapping around the cog, but I highly doubt it extends the life that much.

Let the armchair physics begin.
thurstonboise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 10:39 AM   #8
dustinlikewhat
Bow$$
 
dustinlikewhat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bodymore, Murderland
Bikes: Surly Instigator '02, Schwinn Traveler fixed conversion, '02 Fuji Track
Posts: 2,013
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
it's easier to find 14, 15 or 16 tooth cogs, than it is to find 18 or 19 tooth. if you use a smaller front ring, and blow out your rear cog, you'll have an easier time finding a replacement at your lbs. at least, this is my experience.
dustinlikewhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 10:44 AM   #9
jacobpriest
shadybikes
 
jacobpriest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Waco/Plano/Dallas/Brooklyn, Texas
Bikes:
Posts: 1,141
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyledriver
From the chain's point of view, its better to be layed out over more teeth.
wrong actually. the reason 10 pitch was never NJS certified is because when using smaller circles it makes the effort easier. so since we are talking about the smal pitch and same gear inches, it is easier to use the one with the smaler front.
jacobpriest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 01:27 PM   #10
wroomwroomoops
Sir Fallalot
 
wroomwroomoops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Bikes:
Posts: 5,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by lyledriver
From the chain's point of view, its better to be layed out over more teeth.
Actually, it seems that, with the bigger sprockets ("cogs"), as the links rotate less around the rivet's axis, there is less stress on the bushings/inner plates and rivets. Some american scientists have determined that efficiency is slightly increased, with larger sprockets.
wroomwroomoops is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 01:37 PM   #11
S. cerevisiae
Knows where his towel is
 
S. cerevisiae's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Portage county, Ohio
Bikes: Redline Monocog 29er, Schwinn Worldsport, AMF roadie
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It is better for the cog and chainring to have more teeth "in" the chain. As far as the physics is c6ncerned, I'll leave that to the brainiacs out there.
S. cerevisiae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 01:45 PM   #12
PsySal
Senior Member
 
PsySal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Bikes: Late 80's Miele road racing bike, 2005 Norco Mountaineer
Posts: 90
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Bike mechanic gave this reason to me exactly as the reason that rear freewheel (sorry I have no idea why I'm posting here, I don't have a FG yet... =) needs to be replaced as opposed to the front chainring. He said that your rings will last a lot longer because the force of pedaling is spread out over more teeth, whereas your freewheel (or in the case of FG/SS, cog) has fewer teeth engaging so more wear on the individual teeth.

So maybe that doesn't answer to the chain wear issue, but cog wear?
PsySal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 02:59 PM   #13
wroomwroomoops
Sir Fallalot
 
wroomwroomoops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Bikes:
Posts: 5,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PsySal
l (sorry I have no idea why I'm posting here, I don't have a FG yet... =)
Since when has "Singlespeed & Fixed Gear" become "Fixed Gear Only" ? I missed that transformatory moment. Oh, wait, no, we're still in "Singlespeed & Fixed Gear"! So, it's your lucky day PsySal, you are still allowed to post here, without going to jail. Rejoyce!
wroomwroomoops is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 04:05 PM   #14
soze
ex-everything.
 
soze's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charlestown, MA
Bikes: venerable surly crosscheck
Posts: 602
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Less chain wear, less stress per tooth, looks nicer.

So it's a little heavier. You can make up that weight by taking a big dump in the morning.
soze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 04:20 PM   #15
wroomwroomoops
Sir Fallalot
 
wroomwroomoops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Bikes:
Posts: 5,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by soze
Less chain wear, less stress per tooth, looks nicer.

So it's a little heavier. You can make up that weight by taking a big dump in the morning.
If I do that, I compensate for about 1 Kg-worth of bike hardware.
wroomwroomoops is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 05:18 PM   #16
diff_lock2
Senior_Member2
 
diff_lock2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Finlando NOT: Orlando, Fl
Bikes: Beater + Nishiki Bigfoot X-29
Posts: 1,694
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think the smaller the rear cog is the nicer it looks.

And those gear inches seem pretty far apart, but it looks like most people understand what your talking about. I might add, that the bigger-bigger combo might be able to handle more power with less strain.
diff_lock2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 07:45 PM   #17
Retem
Paste Taster
 
Retem's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Bikes: , Jury Bike, Moto Outcast 29, Spicer standard track frame and spicer custom steel sprint frame.
Posts: 4,392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I build gear combos around two things desired gear size and skid patches thats all
Retem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-19-07, 09:28 PM   #18
Sincitycycler
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Sincitycycler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: "Gosh honey, you pass more like Tony Rominger..."
Bikes: 2005 Scott CR1 Pro - 1992 Panasonix Fixed Conversion 60tx20t
Posts: 3,219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think a track bike looks cool with a big ring/small cog in back, like the 1 hour record holders use.

Wish I had the thighs to power a 52x14!
__________________
"How did all those 'Keep Off the Grass' signs get there?"
Sincitycycler is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:06 AM.