Originally Posted by
Bob Ross
Why would I set up a bike with gearing that's only optimized for terrain conditions that I see ~60%? I like to consider 100% of the terrain I'm likely to encounter!
Every time I descend. Some folks like to go fast downhill. Why not equip your bike to allow that?
My logic is as follows: I often end up climbing at 40-50 cadence on the toughest climbs. More low gears will get me up those climbs faster and with less destruction to the legs that will impact the rest of the day. If I'm climbing that crap, you can bet I'm descending it too, and I will spin out on the steepest parts of the descent. Not so much that I couldn't pedal, but that it becomes hamsterish, and I don't usually bother. But sometimes I do, and when I do, like to catch onto a draft or to catch someone before a switchback, at which point, sure, I'm hamster spinning briefly. On the 50.
But not pedaling on the steepest descents is much less of a loss of time than being destroyed on the steepest climbs, so I go with the 34/50 rings. I even went 11-32 cassette. WHAT? wtf for? Well in my defense I do hit some 14-18% stuff every year, and the gearing is critical for those rides, and never "a problem" for other rides.
Were I Nibali, hammering downhill at 50+ MPH to make time in a pro race, then yeah, sure, I'd be running a full size crank. But I'd also be climbing at 80 cadence on the 39/28 with my 6w/kg FTP.
TL;DR - If you are strong enough to climb your toughest climbs at a reasonable cadence on the 36, then get the 36/52. If not, then get the 34/50. Simple.