Bike Forums > Gears, easier climbs, gear math
 Register All Albums Elite Membership Forum Rules Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

 08-25-08, 01:43 PM #1 angelaharms Spark of the Divine Fire Thread Starter   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Eugene, Oregon Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100 Posts: 211 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) Gears, easier climbs, gear math I want to understand gears better. Anybody want to help? Current bike has 38T crank, and 7 gears in back, ranging from 13-34T. Considering a bike with three gears in front, 28/38/48T, and the back is 8 gears, 11-34T. I know that the tires and geometry will make a difference, but what I'm after now is to understand the math here. Clearly, I have approximately the same gear range on the old bike as on the new one in second. But I'd like to be able to understand it in more detail. How can I tell what specific set of gears will match another specific set? Anybody know a formula? Angela
 08-25-08, 01:56 PM #2 croscoe Senior Member   Join Date: Apr 2007 Bikes: Posts: 562 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s)
 08-25-08, 02:00 PM #3 angelaharms Spark of the Divine Fire Thread Starter   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Eugene, Oregon Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100 Posts: 211 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) Been studying that... it took me a while to make any sense of it. But I think I have gear inches figured out: Diameter * (front TPI) / (rearTPI) A lower number here is "easier" pedaling, or more climbing. Is that right?
 08-25-08, 02:19 PM #4 croscoe Senior Member   Join Date: Apr 2007 Bikes: Posts: 562 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) That' right. The lower the number of gear inches, the "easier" the gear is to pedal.
08-25-08, 02:25 PM   #5
Mr. Underbridge
Senior Member

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Reston, VA
Bikes: 2003 Giant OCR2
Posts: 2,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by angelaharms Been studying that... it took me a while to make any sense of it. But I think I have gear inches figured out: Diameter * (front TPI) / (rearTPI) A lower number here is "easier" pedaling, or more climbing. Is that right?
Yep. But it doesn't take the cranks into account. Sheldon's best metric is "gain ratio", which divides what you have above by the length of the crank. This has some more useful benefits, including:

*gets rid of effects due to varying crank lengths
*makes the result an actual ratio
*is very conceptual - the result ends up being the distance traveled by your wheel divided by the distance traveled by your foot.

So if a certain gear combination has a gain ratio of 5, that means that the wheel travels 5 times as much distance as your foot. This number can be compared between any two bikes.

 08-25-08, 02:30 PM #6 HillRider  Senior Member   Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here! Posts: 30,328 Mentioned: 21 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 688 Post(s) Right, lower is slower and easier. The formula is Gear inches = (Wheel Diameter)*Chainring teeth/cog teeth For you case in the 38T chainring and 34T cog with a 700c or 27" wheel the gear inch would be: GI = 27*38/34 = 30.2 gear-inches For 700c or 27" wheels, the diameter is usually assumed to be 27" which is pertty close for most tire sizes. For MTB wheels the diameter is taken as 26". Use the same calculation for each combination of chairring and cog. BTW, Sheldon Brown's web site has a calcualtor for the gear table for any cassette/chainring set-up. Look here: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/gears/
 08-25-08, 04:20 PM #7 ascend free mallocs   Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: melbourne, australia Bikes: Posts: 520 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/touring/gears.htm -- Another big long article about gears. This one is less about the basics than it is about the geekery though.
 08-25-08, 04:31 PM #8 angelaharms Spark of the Divine Fire Thread Starter   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Eugene, Oregon Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100 Posts: 211 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) I couldn't figure out what the results meant, when I tried Sheldon's calculator. It was a list of percentages. Sorry to be such a n00b.
 08-25-08, 05:35 PM #9 Bill Kapaun Senior Member     Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun Bikes: 86 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds. Posts: 10,133 Mentioned: 2 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 412 Post(s) Gear Inches are based on the old high wheel bikes A 60" diameter wheel was 60 GI. It was "direct drive", meaning every rotation of the crank was one rotation of the wheel, With chain rings and cogs, you have gear multiplication/division. A 48T ring driving a 24T cog means you get 2 rotations of the wheel for every rotation of the crank, or with the 60" wheel, you would have 120 GI. A 48T ring & 24T cog will have EXACTLY the same GI as a 38T ring and a 19T cog or a 28T ring and a 14T cog. ALL are 2:1, and thus 120 GI with our 60" wheel. A 48:16 would be 3:1 or 180 GI. It's just simple arithmetic, really. Ring teeth/ cog teeth X tire diameter. Last edited by Bill Kapaun; 08-25-08 at 05:55 PM.
08-25-08, 05:50 PM   #10
red_hook
Senior Member

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Brooklyn
Bikes:
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by angelaharms I couldn't figure out what the results meant, when I tried Sheldon's calculator. It was a list of percentages. Sorry to be such a n00b.
The percentages between the gears are just the amount of change between one gear and the next at that end of the bike. The percentages are only between the numbers along the top or along the leftmost column (the yellow boxes, the gears themselves).

The numbers in the white boxes are either the gain ratios or the gear inches, depending on which option you set on the first page.

08-25-08, 06:24 PM   #11
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes:
Posts: 12,817
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Quoted: 204 Post(s)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by angelaharms I want to understand gears better. Anybody want to help? Current bike has 38T crank, and 7 gears in back, ranging from 13-34T. Considering a bike with three gears in front, 28/38/48T, and the back is 8 gears, 11-34T. I know that the tires and geometry will make a difference, but what I'm after now is to understand the math here. Clearly, I have approximately the same gear range on the old bike as on the new one in second. But I'd like to be able to understand it in more detail. How can I tell what specific set of gears will match another specific set? Anybody know a formula? Angela
There are many interpretations of gearing, but I think gear inches is as useful as any. Bill gave you a great 5-minute lesson. In setting up the gearing for a particular bike, the first questions are, how high and how low do I need? Your bike under consideration will go as low as almost any bike and similarly as high, so you shouldn't need any easier or harder gears.

 08-25-08, 06:31 PM #12 JanMM rebmeM roineS     Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Metro Indy, IN Bikes: RANS V3 ti, RANS V3 cromo, RANS Screamer Posts: 14,418 Mentioned: 8 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 267 Post(s) Most folks never consider the actual math involved but, rather, just look at the charts or calculators that give you the gear inches for the various combinations of cogs, chainrings and wheel sizes.
 08-25-08, 06:33 PM #13 angelaharms Spark of the Divine Fire Thread Starter   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Eugene, Oregon Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100 Posts: 211 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) So how does 29.1 gear inches compare with 22.5? The old bike goes down to 29.1, and I am hoping I'll be a little stronger on hills on the new one, which goes down to 22.6 (27*28/34). Is that a significant difference, do you think? I honestly couldn't tell subjectively, when I tested the bike. I was pretty tired from testing all of them. (On the other hand, I did climb up a particular bridge three times in one day.) Anyway, I'm a bit of a crip. If it's possible to customize to get better climbing, it might be worth doing.
08-25-08, 06:38 PM   #14
KevinF
Keep on climbing

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Marlborough, Massachusetts
Bikes: 2004 Calfee Tetra Pro
Posts: 2,178
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by angelaharms So how does 29.1 gear inches compare with 22.5? The old bike goes down to 29.1, and I am hoping I'll be a little stronger on hills on the new one, which goes down to 22.6 (27*28/34). Is that a significant difference, do you think?
29.1 to 22.5 is a big drop in gearing.

 08-25-08, 06:58 PM #15 Al1943 Senior Member   Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Oklahoma Bikes: Trek 5500, Colnago C-50 Posts: 9,438 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 1 Post(s) 22.5 is really low. You should be able to climb a tree with that. Al
 08-25-08, 10:27 PM #16 angelaharms Spark of the Divine Fire Thread Starter   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Eugene, Oregon Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100 Posts: 211 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) That's terrific news. Thanks, guys. I'm heavy and also have muscle issues, so I doubt I'll climb a tree, but maybe overpasses will be easier, and occasional hills will be *possible*
 08-26-08, 12:58 AM #17 Bill Kapaun Senior Member     Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun Bikes: 86 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds. Posts: 10,133 Mentioned: 2 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 412 Post(s) I see you're just about 40 miles down the road from me! You always want 1 ger lower than you think you need. IF you could "almost" manage with 29 GI, just a couple less will make a significant difference. There are other factors involved also. A longer crank arm gives you more leverage, thus you can get by with a slightly greater GI, or the opposite with a shorter arm. Bike weight. More weight going uphill requires lower GI. On your current bike, do you have the tires aired up to the max pressure printed on the sidewall? Are they knobbies? SMOOTH street type tires weigh less and roll easier. Is your seat adjusted properly? A little too low and you don't develop all the power from your stroke. See- http://bikenhike.com/page.cfm?pageid=23&FAQid=25
 08-26-08, 08:11 AM #18 angelaharms Spark of the Divine Fire Thread Starter   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Eugene, Oregon Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100 Posts: 211 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) 40 miles... Corvallis? I have tweaked my current bike, except for replacing the very fat (2.125) 26" street tires with only slightly fat ones (1.75). Potential bike has thinner tires, 700c. When I rode the potential bike, it seemed like it was just as hard to get up the test hill as with my old bike, but that might have been just me. I definitely needed to go down to 1-1, though. Old bike is crank-forward though. It might also just have to do with getting used to it. I'ma go ride the new one again this morning.
 08-26-08, 12:12 PM #19 dit Senior Member   Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Middle TN Bikes: 2 Centurian Ironman, Rossin Genisis, Greenspeed GT3, Stowaway (wife) Posts: 653 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) There are folks out there running gears down around 17-19 gi. Sometimes it is just easier to walk up the hill but it sure hurts the ego.
 08-26-08, 12:40 PM #20 DannoXYZ  Senior Member     Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Saratoga, CA Bikes: Posts: 11,634 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 40 Post(s) There's another website somewhere that gives a final number of "development" for gearing. That's the distance the bike travels per turn of the crank. Much easier to understand. To answer Angela's original question, NO, the lowest gearing on those two bikes are not the same: current bike - MTB 38f/34r = 1.118 gear-ratio * (26in*3.14/12in/ft) wheel-circumference = 7.60 ft per crank-revolution new bike - road 28f/34r = 0.824 gear-ratio * (27in*3.14/12in/ft) = 5.82 ft per crank-revolution The new bike will be MUCH easier to pedal up hills in its lowest gear compared to the current one. But you have to get into the 28t granny-ring instead of staying in the middle 38t chainring. Last edited by DannoXYZ; 08-26-08 at 12:49 PM.
 08-26-08, 01:27 PM #21 Bill Kapaun Senior Member     Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Mid Willamette Valley, Orygun Bikes: 86 RockHopper,2008 Specialized Globe. Both upgraded to 9 speeds. Posts: 10,133 Mentioned: 2 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 412 Post(s) "When I rode the potential bike, it seemed like it was just as hard to get up the test hill as with my old bike, but that might have been just me." Did you verify the shift to the granny ring? Maybe it didn't shift? You should be able to nearly climb a wall with 28-34! Was the seat set at the right height? Too low and you can't develop 100% of your thrust. What bike are you getting? I'm on I-5 and it starts with Alban
 08-26-08, 05:28 PM #22 angelaharms Spark of the Divine Fire Thread Starter   Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Eugene, Oregon Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100 Posts: 211 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) Today I bought a Raleigh Detour 3.5, 24 speed, girly-girl frame. Here's Raleigh's pic. (Mine has the seat up and the handlebars down.) I'll try it on some hills (bridges & overpasses, really) and get back to you about the easyness. Thanks to everybody for the help figuring out gears. Angela
08-26-08, 09:07 PM   #23
jamesd416
Member

Join Date: Aug 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Al1943 22.5 is really low. You should be able to climb a tree with that. Al
Agreed. It's too late for the math but my new LHT bottom end is 26t front 34t rear and I think I could climb straight up the wall of our house.

James
http://onelessindenver.blogspot.com

 08-26-08, 09:15 PM #24 JiveTurkey Low car diet     Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Corvallis, OR, USA Bikes: 2006 Windsor Dover w/105, 2007 GT Avalanche w/XT, 1995 Trek 820 setup for touring, 201? Yeah single-speed folder, 199? Huffy tandem. Posts: 2,407 Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s) Quoted: 0 Post(s) The most intuitive output on the gear-calculator to me is MPH/KPH per given RPM; it's much easier for me to compare gears.
08-26-08, 09:54 PM   #25
angelaharms
Spark of the Divine Fire

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Bikes: Raleigh Detour 4.5, Trek Sole Ride 100
Posts: 211
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by jamesd416 Agreed. It's too late for the math but my new LHT bottom end is 26t front 34t rear and I think I could climb straight up the wall of our house. James http://onelessindenver.blogspot.com
This is helping me, for sure. I just rode the new one more, and I know I ain't climbin' up no walls. What it's helping me with is getting a sort-of concrete way of comparing my ability with "normal" ability. I am generally too hard on myself. Like I think most people are in real pain doing normal things, but they don't mind, and I'm somehow just too weak to buck up and do it. But this sort of feedback helps me understand that I really do have a different experience, and maybe I should cut myself some slack!

Anyway, sorry to get so personal. Thanks again, and stuff. I'm enjoying experimenting with my new improved climbing ability.

Angela