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 01-02-05, 07:20 PM   #1
drolldurham
ogre
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: arlington, va
Bikes: surly steamroller fixie, '90 cannondale SR 800
Posts: 399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
gear ratio question

what's the difference between having, say, 49:16 (3.0625) versus 46:15 (3.0666) versus 40:13 (3.07). obviously there are differences in the numbers, but does anyone really use a 40:13? if you were looking for a ratio around 3.0, wouldn't 40:13 be better than 49:16 because it's lighter?
drolldurham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 07:28 PM   #2
pitboss
cxmagazine dot com
 
pitboss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: WI
Bikes: Titus road, Fort CX
Posts: 8,269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
sure, the chain will be shorter too. But a 40t track ring is right up there with a 10t track cog.
Most of the track chainrings run higher baseline tooth counts (that sounds odd...don't it?). You can find smaller tooth count chainring in road/MTB applications. Hence teeth ratios common from track like 46-53:12-17, maybe even higher in the front ring, but most track racers do not run 18-23t cogs, at least the ones I know of.
pitboss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 07:30 PM   #3
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)
they'll all take about the same effort to push.
However, people think that fewer teeth on the chainring and cog tend to lead to a higher rate of wear. Mind you, the 40:13 will be lighter, but not light enough for you to notice or care. Then again, a 40 tooth chainring should cost less than a 49 toother.
baxtefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 09:24 PM   #4
pgringo69
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: austin/san antonio corridor
Bikes: a dozen or more at any given time. currently: pro concept pro, badd 24", hutch trickstar, looptail pk ripper, reynolds quad, 82 hutch pro racer, yamaha "a" model, matthews monoshock, and several more.
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
also, with small gears and rear facing horizontal dropouts, some gear combos make it quite difficult to pop the chain off the sprocket to remove the rear wheel.
pgringo69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 09:29 PM   #5
BostonFixed
Banned.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgringo69
also, with small gears and rear facing horizontal dropouts, some gear combos make it quite difficult to pop the chain off the sprocket to remove the rear wheel.
What? I don't follow. Why would one ratio make it harder to remove the wheel from the dropouts? If you talking about the position of the axle/wheel in the dropouts, thats a different story....
BostonFixed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 09:31 PM   #6
luciano
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Big rings feel good. Those who know, know.
luciano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 10:26 PM   #7
drolldurham
ogre
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: arlington, va
Bikes: surly steamroller fixie, '90 cannondale SR 800
Posts: 399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
well crap. i ordered a 42 up front... oh well, it was cheap.
drolldurham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 10:31 PM   #8
pgringo69
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: austin/san antonio corridor
Bikes: a dozen or more at any given time. currently: pro concept pro, badd 24", hutch trickstar, looptail pk ripper, reynolds quad, 82 hutch pro racer, yamaha "a" model, matthews monoshock, and several more.
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonFixed
What? I don't follow. Why would one ratio make it harder to remove the wheel from the dropouts? If you talking about the position of the axle/wheel in the dropouts, thats a different story....
yes. some gear ratios will force the wheel to be slammed forward in the dropouts, so you can't get much slack to get the chain off the front sprocket. in addition, it is harder to get a chain off of a smaller sprocket when there is little slack in the chain.
pgringo69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 10:46 PM   #9
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgringo69
yes. some gear ratios will force the wheel to be slammed forward in the dropouts, so you can't get much slack to get the chain off the front sprocket. in addition, it is harder to get a chain off of a smaller sprocket when there is little slack in the chain.
yeah but this can be independent of rear cog size.
its more dependent on chainstay lenght.


then again, if you have 2 different gear ratios that somehow manage to put the rear axle at the same position in the dropout, wouldn't it be easier to remove the chain from the smaller rear cog?
baxtefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 11:39 PM   #10
bostontrevor
Retrogrouch in Training
 
bostontrevor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Knee-deep in the day-to-day
Bikes:
Posts: 5,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgringo69
in addition, it is harder to get a chain off of a smaller sprocket when there is little slack in the chain.
Actually the opposite is true. A small cog means that it takes less slack to be able to get the necessary play to clear the teeth and move the chain laterally off the cog. Note that this applies not only in the stand but on the street, so a drivetrain with smaller cogs and chainrings will be easier to derail.
bostontrevor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-05, 11:45 PM   #11
WithNail
Senior Member
 
WithNail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Bikes:
Posts: 772
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
you know you could just add a link on the chain
WithNail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 11:03 AM   #12
pgringo69
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: austin/san antonio corridor
Bikes: a dozen or more at any given time. currently: pro concept pro, badd 24", hutch trickstar, looptail pk ripper, reynolds quad, 82 hutch pro racer, yamaha "a" model, matthews monoshock, and several more.
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bostontrevor
Actually the opposite is true. A small cog means that it takes less slack to be able to get the necessary play to clear the teeth and move the chain laterally off the cog. Note that this applies not only in the stand but on the street, so a drivetrain with smaller cogs and chainrings will be easier to derail.
i'm not trying to be rude, but that is wrong. removal from smaller sprockets takes more slack because there is a more severe angle difference needed to allow the chain to climb over the leading teeth of the sprocket for removal. the same goes for belts on pulleys on a car. it's easier to get a somewhat tight belt on/off a large pulley than a small pulley as you rotate them. try it.

yes, this does depend on chainstay length and dropout length and sometimes rear wheel setup preference. sometimes a bikes dropouts may be too short to ad a link. when dealing with smaller gears, taking a link out or adding a link make a much bigger difference in wheel position in the dropout so _sometimes_ the dropout can not accomodate. also, remember i'm talking about horizontal rear facing dropouts. so, you can always run smaller gears, but you may have to change frames to be able to run the exact gearing/wheel position setup you want.

peace.



*edit* ok ok you could use a halflink, but i really do not care for those things so i normally don't even consider them.

Last edited by pgringo69; 01-03-05 at 11:45 AM.
pgringo69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 12:01 PM   #13
bostontrevor
Retrogrouch in Training
 
bostontrevor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Knee-deep in the day-to-day
Bikes:
Posts: 5,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Anyone care to do the math? I'm not convinced. Yes, angular separation is higher the smaller you go. At the same time, so too are the number of teeth that must actually be cleared in order to actually remove the chain reduced. Imagine if you will a cog that's so small that it has only 4 teeth. If I can get the chain off of 2 of them, I have cleared an entire semicircle. On the other hand if we consider instead a 68 tooth ring as at

http://www.bikecult.com/works/chainr...sinTTcrank.jpg

it takes far more than 2 teeth worth of slack.

I don't think it's reasonable to compare with belts and pulleys because a chain drive flexes a great deal less than a rubber belt. So while the increase stretch available along the length of a large belt is very appreciable that's much less true for a strong steel chain.

What is required is that a certain amount of play be available to sufficiently separate the chain from the chainwheel or cog. If I have 1/2" of slack in my chain, that equates to 4 teeth worth of play (what that actually amounts to in terms of clearing the teeth and moving laterally off the wheel is a harder question to answer since it requires knowing things about the lateral rigidity of the chain). Obviously on larger rings, as cited above, that amount of slack will clear less of the drivetrain than on smaller rings.
bostontrevor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 03:17 PM   #14
pgringo69
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: austin/san antonio corridor
Bikes: a dozen or more at any given time. currently: pro concept pro, badd 24", hutch trickstar, looptail pk ripper, reynolds quad, 82 hutch pro racer, yamaha "a" model, matthews monoshock, and several more.
Posts: 114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i'm just speaking from a few decades of experience/obsession with ss. *shrug*

bottom line...go for it. if it works for you, great.
pgringo69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 04:10 PM   #15
junioroverlord
Better than you since 83!
 
junioroverlord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Up a big F'ing Hill
Bikes: Fixed Gear 79 Schwinn Sprint
Posts: 1,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by drolldurham
well crap. i ordered a 42 up front... oh well, it was cheap.

42 is a man's chainring. Hold your head up high and rejoice in the awesomeness you have just thrown yourself into. Now get a 14 t cog in the back and we'll be twins!
junioroverlord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 04:28 PM   #16
Ken Cox
King of the Hipsters
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bend, Oregon
Bikes: Realm Cycles Custom
Posts: 2,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Luciano wrote:

"Big rings feel good. Those who know, know."

This brings us back to the original question.

One can acheive the same ratio with both larger and smaller chainring/sprocket combinations.
If one goes with a smaller pair, he gets a shorter chain and lighter weight all around.
If one goes with a larger pair, according to luciano, it feels good.
To me, a larger pair would seem to impose less stress and wear and tear on the sprocket, chainring and chain, but I arrive at this intuitively and I can't substantiate it.

On the surface, though, it seems like a trade off between less weight on the small side, and less wear and tear (and perhaps better feel) on the large side.
Any comments about how it feels?
How it feels matters.

Oh, and should I have done all the size matters jokes just to get them out of the way?
Ken Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 04:35 PM   #17
BostonFixed
Banned.
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You are right about bigger ring/cog combos having less wear, but more weight. Bigger ring/cog combos also have a better 'feel' if you know what i'm sayin. It's hard to describe, but its like a smoother feeling. You have to ride it to know....
BostonFixed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 04:36 PM   #18
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)
the weight difference would be negligible.
baxtefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 06:25 PM   #19
drolldurham
ogre
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: arlington, va
Bikes: surly steamroller fixie, '90 cannondale SR 800
Posts: 399
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by junioroverlord
42 is a man's chainring. Hold your head up high and rejoice in the awesomeness you have just thrown yourself into. Now get a 14 t cog in the back and we'll be twins!
actually, i am! but i haven't put the bike together yet, and after all this i might as well just order a 49:17 or a 49:16 and forget (i.e. put them on ebay for $1) the stuff i have now.

another bad thing about 42:14 is that it gives you only one part of the tire to skid on (as explained here: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ccatalan/skid.html )

wellp, good thing i orderd the drivetrain before doing the research
drolldurham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 06:31 PM   #20
dolface
Iguana Subsystem
 
dolface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: san francisco
Bikes:
Posts: 4,016
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
the skid-patch thing is easy to fix, just rotate your tire periodically.
(just make sure you don't rotate it the distance between your skid-patches).
dolface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 06:39 PM   #21
jitensha!
ready for the freakout
 
jitensha!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: the 757
Bikes: Spicer track
Posts: 991
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by junioroverlord
42 is a man's chainring.
no. when you hit at least 46, then we'll talk.
jitensha! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 07:11 PM   #22
bostontrevor
Retrogrouch in Training
 
bostontrevor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Knee-deep in the day-to-day
Bikes:
Posts: 5,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Nuts! Balls! Hair!

Am I in the club?
bostontrevor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 08:31 PM   #23
thechrisproject
Guy with bike
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Madison, WI
Bikes:
Posts: 401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgringo69
also, with small gears and rear facing horizontal dropouts, some gear combos make it quite difficult to pop the chain off the sprocket to remove the rear wheel.
If they're rear facing, don't they cease to be dropouts?
thechrisproject is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 08:35 PM   #24
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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thechrisproject
If they're rear facing, don't they cease to be dropouts?
yes
baxtefer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-05, 09:03 PM   #25
Mr. Shadow
I need more bikes!!!
 
Mr. Shadow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Durham, NC
Bikes: 2 roadies, 7 fixed-gears, 1 hardtail, 1 full suspension mtb, and 1 hybrid...so far.
Posts: 472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Three of mine use a 52t front ring with a 16t, 18t and a 19t cog in the rear.
The 52x19t combo is 75" which is about the same as my Van Dessel's
44x16t or 74". It is the best comprise for the hills and rollers we have
in North Carolina. The 52x16t combo is pushing 88" and makes the hills
a bit tougher with more standing. It can hit close to 4o mph on the way
down though. My commuters both run a 42x16t.
Mr. Shadow 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 01:57 AM.