Gearing and shifting patterns
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 61
Bikes: 2007 Specialized Tricross Sport
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Gearing and shifting patterns
As part of my never-ending quest to overthink everything, I took a quick look at my shifting pattern. This has probably been done before, but I haven't seen it. Goal was to shift from the smallest gear ratio to largest with the most even steps and in a way that was simple and avoided high-loss combinations.
I have 30/39/50 teeth on the front, 11/13/15/17/20/23/26/30/34 teeth on the back.
I measured the approximate lateral separation of the rings, in mm. Higher separations were avoided. Also gave a bit more preference toward higher tooth count combinations, since I believe those result in less friction loss.
Tried to avoid small/no changes in gear ratio (delta ratio), as well as large ones.
Weighted all of these things to assign an overall value to the combination. Value is from 0-10, with higher being better. It really doesn't mean anything by itself, but might be a sign to look closer at a particular combination.
Here is what I came up with. Nothing terribly surprising here, but it should optimize everything a bit and isn't hard to remember. Will probably paint a couple small dots on my shifting indicators to help.
One interesting thing is that there are only 13 combinations here. The eliminated ones really wouldn't add much functionality. This supports my plan to eventually replace that 3 ring front.
Got a couple questions too.
Anyone have a better way to measure lateral separation of the gears? I just used a straightedge on the largest front ring and measured from there. Fairly accurate, but could be better.
Also, why don't we see something like 4 front and 4 rear gears? It shouldn't be too hard to write up something that, when given min/max ratio, min/max gear size, and number of gears of front/back would assess all possible tooth counts to find the one with the most even spacing. I suppose it would make things a bit less intuitive - needing to change both the front and back gear for more of the jumps. Would be interesting to see that combined with computerized gear selection. That might be a project for another month though.
I have 30/39/50 teeth on the front, 11/13/15/17/20/23/26/30/34 teeth on the back.
I measured the approximate lateral separation of the rings, in mm. Higher separations were avoided. Also gave a bit more preference toward higher tooth count combinations, since I believe those result in less friction loss.
Tried to avoid small/no changes in gear ratio (delta ratio), as well as large ones.
Weighted all of these things to assign an overall value to the combination. Value is from 0-10, with higher being better. It really doesn't mean anything by itself, but might be a sign to look closer at a particular combination.
Here is what I came up with. Nothing terribly surprising here, but it should optimize everything a bit and isn't hard to remember. Will probably paint a couple small dots on my shifting indicators to help.
One interesting thing is that there are only 13 combinations here. The eliminated ones really wouldn't add much functionality. This supports my plan to eventually replace that 3 ring front.
Got a couple questions too.
Anyone have a better way to measure lateral separation of the gears? I just used a straightedge on the largest front ring and measured from there. Fairly accurate, but could be better.
Also, why don't we see something like 4 front and 4 rear gears? It shouldn't be too hard to write up something that, when given min/max ratio, min/max gear size, and number of gears of front/back would assess all possible tooth counts to find the one with the most even spacing. I suppose it would make things a bit less intuitive - needing to change both the front and back gear for more of the jumps. Would be interesting to see that combined with computerized gear selection. That might be a project for another month though.
Last edited by Hatsuwr; 12-19-18 at 10:52 AM.
#2
Banned
next place The cog T count on a vertical side, chainring on top of a grid .. plug in the numbers
Draw a zigzag line between them as the Ratio values are closer to each other .. and there is your sequence
visual.. tape it to your bike..
BITD we had half step gearing... middle & large chain ring close together in size, so gear sequence alternated between them..
'granny' took up at the bottom end..
Brompton 6 speed uses 2 cogs half stepping .. a wider ratio 3 speed hub.. now..
_________________________________
In the 50's I put together a 3 speed hub, with 3 cogs and a triple chainring crankset
now the crank can be another internal gear .. rear internal gear hub's engineers sort out the sequence for you..
Like that dual range German 7 speed hub.... for 14 speeds all in a row..
....
.....
Draw a zigzag line between them as the Ratio values are closer to each other .. and there is your sequence
visual.. tape it to your bike..
BITD we had half step gearing... middle & large chain ring close together in size, so gear sequence alternated between them..
'granny' took up at the bottom end..
Brompton 6 speed uses 2 cogs half stepping .. a wider ratio 3 speed hub.. now..
_________________________________
In the 50's I put together a 3 speed hub, with 3 cogs and a triple chainring crankset
now the crank can be another internal gear .. rear internal gear hub's engineers sort out the sequence for you..
Like that dual range German 7 speed hub.... for 14 speeds all in a row..
....
.....
Last edited by fietsbob; 12-19-18 at 11:19 AM.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Llano Estacado
Posts: 3,702
Bikes: old clunker
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 684 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 105 Times
in
83 Posts
OP: Your methodology will not find the optimum shift patterns, which depend on conditions, exertion and some other stuff not in your spreadsheet. If you ride a lot more you will find them by experience and intuition.
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
Back in the day when men were men 10-speed meant 2 on the front and 5 on the back we had to make use of every combination so we did a lot of that kind of stuff. Some guys would, indeed figure out the optimum gear progression and tape it to their handlebars.
As the number of rear cogs has gradually progressed, we have many, many more ratios to choose from. So many that most riders don't use them all. I think of a 3 X 10 drive train as having 3 gear ranges: 1 for steep uphills, one for use most of the time and 1 reserved for downhills and tail wind days. The rear derailleur serves as a trim within those 3 ranges.
I have neither experience nor interest with electronic shifting, but I can see where that may actually bring back the old days. Electronic shifting can "remember" all of the potential ratios to pick the next one in sequence and shift both derailleurs to optimize the chain line.
As the number of rear cogs has gradually progressed, we have many, many more ratios to choose from. So many that most riders don't use them all. I think of a 3 X 10 drive train as having 3 gear ranges: 1 for steep uphills, one for use most of the time and 1 reserved for downhills and tail wind days. The rear derailleur serves as a trim within those 3 ranges.
I have neither experience nor interest with electronic shifting, but I can see where that may actually bring back the old days. Electronic shifting can "remember" all of the potential ratios to pick the next one in sequence and shift both derailleurs to optimize the chain line.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
#5
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 61
Bikes: 2007 Specialized Tricross Sport
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Don't think conditions will affect much either way, and unless you want to add more complication to the progression, this should help with exertion if anything.
Still, when choosing between 50/34 and 30/20 which have only a .03 difference in ratio, the decision is pretty clear to me. I'd even go so far as to say optimal, regardless of conditions, exertion, etc. Maybe if you broke one of your arms, although with that choice I'd still probably just lean over and shift carefully
#6
Virgo
Back in the day when men were men 10-speed meant 2 on the front and 5 on the back we had to make use of every combination so we did a lot of that kind of stuff. Some guys would, indeed figure out the optimum gear progression and tape it to their handlebars.
As the number of rear cogs has gradually progressed, we have many, many more ratios to choose from. So many that most riders don't use them all. I think of a 3 X 10 drive train as having 3 gear ranges: 1 for steep uphills, one for use most of the time and 1 reserved for downhills and tail wind days. The rear derailleur serves as a trim within those 3 ranges.
I have neither experience nor interest with electronic shifting, but I can see where that may actually bring back the old days. Electronic shifting can "remember" all of the potential ratios to pick the next one in sequence and shift both derailleurs to optimize the chain line.
As the number of rear cogs has gradually progressed, we have many, many more ratios to choose from. So many that most riders don't use them all. I think of a 3 X 10 drive train as having 3 gear ranges: 1 for steep uphills, one for use most of the time and 1 reserved for downhills and tail wind days. The rear derailleur serves as a trim within those 3 ranges.
I have neither experience nor interest with electronic shifting, but I can see where that may actually bring back the old days. Electronic shifting can "remember" all of the potential ratios to pick the next one in sequence and shift both derailleurs to optimize the chain line.
Edit: if it's really really windy, just don't use the big ring at all. It took some practiced restraint on my part to get out of the habit. "It's there, so I'm gonna use it".
Last edited by Phamilton; 12-19-18 at 12:30 PM.
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Llano Estacado
Posts: 3,702
Bikes: old clunker
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 684 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 105 Times
in
83 Posts
Well, I wasn't trying to define optimum. "Goal was to shift from the smallest gear ratio to largest with the most even steps and in a way that was simple and avoided high-loss combinations."
Don't think conditions will affect much either way, and unless you want to add more complication to the progression, this should help with exertion if anything.
Still, when choosing between 50/34 and 30/20 which have only a .03 difference in ratio, the decision is pretty clear to me. I'd even go so far as to say optimal, regardless of conditions, exertion, etc. Maybe if you broke one of your arms, although with that choice I'd still probably just lean over and shift carefully
Don't think conditions will affect much either way, and unless you want to add more complication to the progression, this should help with exertion if anything.
Still, when choosing between 50/34 and 30/20 which have only a .03 difference in ratio, the decision is pretty clear to me. I'd even go so far as to say optimal, regardless of conditions, exertion, etc. Maybe if you broke one of your arms, although with that choice I'd still probably just lean over and shift carefully
Most people who ride more than a little will just grab some lower gears as quickly as possible to minimize further slowing. Exactly which lower gear is not as important as shifting quickly. Can't seem to find those factors in your chart. [And most people who ride more than a little will know other scenarios.]
Friendly suggestion: Ride more and you'll be much happier.
#8
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 61
Bikes: 2007 Specialized Tricross Sport
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Just a month ago I switched from commuting on 2 x 6 to 3 x 7. Just like you said, cruise in middle ring, climb in the small ring, descend in big ring (or tailwind cruise). No sequential shifting required, and redundancies are irrelevant. Adjust for wind and fine tune cadence (trim) with RD. If the wide range 9 spd 11-34 cassette leaves one with steps that are bigger than desired, tighten them up with a 12-27 or similar. If I was running a 30/39/50 triple, a 10 spd 12-30 would give nice tight steps between all the gears in all 3 ranges only sacrificing the very top and bottom end, and not by much.
Edit: if it's really really windy, just don't use the big ring at all. It took some practiced restraint on my part to get out of the habit. "It's there, so I'm gonna use it".
Edit: if it's really really windy, just don't use the big ring at all. It took some practiced restraint on my part to get out of the habit. "It's there, so I'm gonna use it".
So you're pulling a steep hill and you're getting gassed and you're already on the wrong side of your power curve -- what do you do? Consult a spreadsheet and think about it?
Most people who ride more than a little will just grab some lower gears as quickly as possible to minimize further slowing. Exactly which lower gear is not as important as shifting quickly. Can't seem to find those factors in your chart. [And most people who ride more than a little will know other scenarios.]
Friendly suggestion: Ride more and you'll be much happier.
Most people who ride more than a little will just grab some lower gears as quickly as possible to minimize further slowing. Exactly which lower gear is not as important as shifting quickly. Can't seem to find those factors in your chart. [And most people who ride more than a little will know other scenarios.]
Friendly suggestion: Ride more and you'll be much happier.
Also, I'm quite happy, but thank you for the concern!
Last edited by Hatsuwr; 12-19-18 at 12:43 PM.
#9
Banned
OK but not everyone uses a out of the box road triple, which your50,39,30 is ,
but I note, computer programmers want to show off here how they spend their non riding time..
as a presentation of that .. nice work.. adding colors and etc..
there are others, that take input from users of the tool ..
I like the one John Allen maintains for the late Sheldon Brown gears ..
...
but I note, computer programmers want to show off here how they spend their non riding time..
as a presentation of that .. nice work.. adding colors and etc..
there are others, that take input from users of the tool ..
I like the one John Allen maintains for the late Sheldon Brown gears ..
...
#10
Virgo
That's essentially what my results come down to, although with that added point that the middle ring use is going to be (roughly) most effective when using the 15/17/20/23 rear gears, in my specific situation. Also don't use the large/small ring on the wrong side of that range. Personally, I'd go up or down one for short bursts if I'm not planning on using the small or large ring anyway. Should be more efficient and have less wear by not doing that long term though.
#11
Virgo
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 61
Bikes: 2007 Specialized Tricross Sport
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
OK but not everyone uses a out of the box road triple, which your50,39,30 is ,
but I note, computer programmers want to show off here how they spend their non riding time..
as a presentation of that .. nice work.. adding colors and etc..
there are others, that take input from users of the tool ..
I like the one John Allen maintains for the late Sheldon Brown gears ..
but I note, computer programmers want to show off here how they spend their non riding time..
as a presentation of that .. nice work.. adding colors and etc..
there are others, that take input from users of the tool ..
I like the one John Allen maintains for the late Sheldon Brown gears ..
And ya, I don't expect the final results to be applicable to anyone else. You'd have to match up all the gear sizes, as well as their relative lateral positions.
It seems like you might be getting the idea that I'm trying to push a rigid mathematical framework of riding on others. Just want to assure you that this isn't the case! Firstly because I'm just sharing my results - throw them in the trash if you want, doesn't bother me! But I'm also not blind to the experiential aspect of riding. I do think there are a lot of less-than-ideal habits out there worth examining, and giving a fair chance to their alternatives. At the end of the day though, do what makes you happy. Efficiency might be the point of this post, but I'd rather have fun going slow than be miserable and fast!
#13
Jedi Master
It looks like you figured out that you should use the low end of the cassette with the little ring, the high end with the big ring and the middle with the middle. What am I missing?
#14
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 61
Bikes: 2007 Specialized Tricross Sport
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Besides the analysis technique, the primary useful result is to point out the specific points at which I should ideally transition from the small/medium/large rings, and noting that a single step up/down in the cassette should accompany those transitions (with my particular setup.)
#15
Nigel
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,991
Bikes: 1980s and 1990s steel: CyclePro, Nishiki, Schwinn, SR, Trek........
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 384 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
That's essentially what my results come down to, although with that added point that the middle ring use is going to be (roughly) most effective when using the 15/17/20/23 rear gears, in my specific situation. Also don't use the large/small ring on the wrong side of that range. Personally, I'd go up or down one for short bursts if I'm not planning on using the small or large ring anyway. Should be more efficient and have less wear by not doing that long term though........
There is no need for every bike to be able to handle every possible terrain; modify your bike to suit how and where you ride.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225
Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 643 Times
in
364 Posts
I find I can crank out the numbers using a pocket calculator almost as fast as looking them up on a chart.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
#17
Virgo
#18
Jedi Master
I like the Mike Sherman gear calculator the best.
#21
Senior Member
#22
Dirty Heathen
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MC-778, 6250 fsw
Posts: 2,182
Bikes: 1997 Cannondale, 1976 Bridgestone, 1998 SoftRide, 1989 Klein, 1989 Black Lightning #0033
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 889 Post(s)
Liked 906 Times
in
534 Posts
Essentially, that there’s a lot of overlap in the middle, vintage half-step setups notwithstanding.
Using the gear-inch calculator also accounts for wheel and tire sizes, which is useful when comparing different bikes in your stable.
I think what’s confusing people is that you’re looking really hard at the ‘lateral measurement’ between the cogs as some sort of indicator. I mean, the cogs are always going to be evenly spaced, and the point on the cassette where the ratios overlap has only to do with the number of teeth on the cogs, not where they are in the order.
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: western Massachusetts (greater Springfield area)
Posts: 699
Bikes: Velosolex St. Tropez, LeMond Zurich (spine bike), Rotator swb recumbent
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 67 Times
in
32 Posts
Originally Posted by Also, [i
why don't we see something like 4 front and 4 rear gears?[/i] It shouldn't be too hard to write up something that, when given min/max ratio, min/max gear size, and number of gears of front/back would assess all possible tooth counts to find the one with the most even spacing. I suppose it would make things a bit less intuitive - needing to change both the front and back gear for more of the jumps. Would be interesting to see that combined with computerized gear selection. That might be a project for another month though.
In the old half-step gearing mentioned above, both were shifted if you needed a small change in gearing. With down-tube shifters you could shift both with one hand. It is actually easier with todays indexed brake-shifters, but why bother with 9-11 (or is it 12) cogs on the back?