Originally Posted by
jaycb74
My mtn bike has plenty of granny gears, why don't the road bikes come with a better setup on the low end?
Profits. Very low gearing and low gearing with tight spacing both require a triple crank which increases bike, crank, front-derailleur, and usually shifter SKUs which cut profits.
Thanks for any insight/advice.
IMHO,
1. Cassettes with jumps larger than one tooth through the 19 cog are unsuitable for road riding because they lack the most comfortable gear for many situations.
2. Cranks without one ring covering about 45-75 gear inches eschewing cross-chained combinations are at best sub-optimal for many road rides due to the increased front shifting.
Ex: 53-39-26 x 13-14-15-16-17-18-19-21-23-25
How can this be a good setup for an all around bike that will be used for a significant amount of climbing?
It's a compromise favoring the bike companies. Lots of us made do with 42x28 low gears when 10 speeds meant 2x5 and managed with lower cadence. Customers could theoretically do the same today although more cogs allow both smaller starting cogs for people who can't spin and larger ending cogs.
Am I doomed to suffer on climbs if I upgrade to a nice carbon bike
No. You can still hang your choice of components on a frame set. You can also start with a complete bike to get the OEM parts discount, replace what you don't want, and sell the left overs as new take-offs. Either way you don't even need to settle for currently produced parts.
When I weighed somewhere between 185 and 205 pounds (in decent shape I'm under 150, and great shape under 140 with aerobic capacity matching that size) I installed NOS 2010 Campagnolo Centaur levers, used 2004-2006 Record Titanium triple derailleurs, and an ebay FSA SLK-Lite triple crank on my bike (with the kids past their odyssey years I'd have splurged for a Lightning carbon crank). I could have done the same on a new frame.