View Single Post
Old 12-19-01 | 08:59 AM
  #10  
John E's Avatar
John E
feros ferio
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 22,374
Likes: 1,847
From: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us

Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;

Originally posted by Richard D
... I'm probably going to have to go from 7sp to 9sp. Forgive my ignorance, but does this generally mean a similar bottom and top with closer gearing in between or gearing the same difference apart but with a higher top and lower bottom?

... a Shimano front mech which seems to be the weakest part in terms of performance - I get next to no mis-shifts on the rear but the front isn't anywhere near as reliable (is this just the nature of the front?).

1) Whether to obtain a higher high, a lower low, both, or neither during the 7-to-9 upgrade is entirely up to you. If you are happy with your current gear range, go for the closer-ratio progression. [For a road bike, low 40s (e.g. 42/26 or 39/24) to high 90s (e.g. 48/13 or 50/14) works well for me.]
2) The rear mech will almost always work better than the front, which is arguably the most primitive part of the drivetrain. The rear guides the slack lower portion of the chain across small steps, whereas the front drags the tensioned upper lnks across much larger steps. (This, and the fact that I'm a retrogrouch, is why I still use half-step or one-and-a-half-step gearing, with 3- or 8-tooth jumps in front, rather than the more modern crossover patterns, with their 10- to 14-tooth steps.)
John E is offline  
Reply