thing is the 11 tooth cog itself is inherently inefficient because of the angle the chain breaks over the cog. its more inefficient than an internally geared hub.

excellent psa!!!!!

From my limited experience with the Gran Sport, I'd say that 26T is indeed the maximum cog size, and I wouldn't try to wrap more chain than 26T either. So, if it were me, with 13-26 in the rear, I'd try to get a 49/36 in front to work.

:thumb:
Finally, someone that shares my general view.... I think. Though I'd still like a ratio for downhill that lets me pedal and feel like I'm doing something even though is just as good or better. If I'm coasting, I'm tired.

At 67 I love compact cranks!

I guess I'm a bit late noticing this thread, but I'll toss out an idea that directly addresses the thread title.

I started building up what are now called compact doubles when I looked carefully at which gear ratios I actually used and which I didn't really need. It was long before I ever heard the term "compact double". I rarely use and never actually need any gear higher than, say, 92 inches. I do like a low gear around 32 inches for spinning up some of the hills around here.

As for people being weak, I don't know about that but do know it's an insulting generality to throw out. "People" covers all of us and I'm pretty sure we span a broad range of capabilities, and with pretty good or at least understandable reasons for being who and what we are.

I had no idea this thread would generate so much discussion. I really appreciate some of the responses and this thread has opened my eyes to the importance of cadence and the need to match your set up to the road conditions you ride on.

So for me on this wonderfully flat island, I now see that I was much better off with my 46-17 FG set up than I have been riding around mostly using my 52-13 geared set up. I actually think the 46T chain ring and a corncob in the back (14-18) would be ideal for me.

Thanks for enlightening me!

I find the 11t useful on long gradual descents... 1-2% maybe with some tail wind. I'm not putting a lot of torque into the wheel, but I can go faster than coasting at a moderate cadence... so who cares about efficiency in that scenario?

Up Kapelmuur in a 53T, when men were men. Cobblestones with a max grade of 19.8%.

Don't forget age, health history and their effects on fitness.

I was surprised when I got back into significant cycling that the gearing that had worked in Colorado mountains wasn't low enough for the steep hills (10%+ is not uncommon) in my new home of Seattle, WA. Now my bikes became much more effective, at just getting home as well as everything else, with triple cranks. BTW, I've always been a 90-100 rpm spinner on flat roads, which certainly affects my preferred gearing.

That re-start at age 43 was invigorating with 40,000 miles in the subsequent 12 years, including several multi-week self-supported tours in Europe where triple cranks worked exceedingly well (one being the honeymoon on bikes in SE France with bride that I first met on the 200-mile STP) and here in the PNW. Then my previously always excellent health got "interesting", and I've had to come to grips with how much longer it takes to recover from surgeries with age.

I'm now 68 and mostly recovered from four significant medical events, enjoy riding as much as ever, but the chain rings have gotten a little smaller and the cogs a little bigger. And my cycling friends, many met through this forum, are fantastic as well as accommodating. And as I've noted previously, that bride of 19 years now loves her compact double with the huge cog range in back, as much as I love my 8-speed triples. I'm disappointed that manufacturers dictate what we are supposed to prefer, but the used component world and those good friends take care of my triple needs quite well. I am starting to hoard better 28.6mm clamp-on triple FD's, however.

Horses for courses...

i see your point. i guess because i see it as useless doesnt mean it isnt useful for others. usually if i am on a long descent i am touring with a fairly large load and thrilled to be coasting. i certainly dont begrudge you your 11, i just dont want to have to buy one myself.

Did he forget about that the lever on the left?

I would agree though that real men wear Mapei kits.

Boonen: little ring
https://cdn-cyclingtips.pressidium.c...ingTips-18.jpg

Cancellara: little ring
http://cdn.media.cyclingnews.com/201...1_full_490.jpg

Sagan: little ring
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f1/57/83/f...b698c03297.jpg

Museeuw was inhuman.

You would think with carbon wonder bikes and a two foot saddle/bar drop they could climb it in the big ring.

wow how candyass...

Why does he constantly ride standing up?
An intelligent rider would select a more appropriate smaller chain ring and ride sitting.

Also, are those skinny tires good for riding on cobblestones?

I'd go with didn't know better.

I'd also put money on Boonen, Cancellara or Sagan.

I would think those carbon wonder bikes would assplode on the cobbles.

But that's just me.

11T
I used to think that the 11 cog was just "marketing". But:

The 11 cog lets the rider use a 34-12 without being completely cross chained. That's good up past 20 mph without having to shift to the 50 chainring. One advantage of a 39 chainring is it's higher top speed without having to shift to big ring on flat rides.

Your easy pedaling on long downhills is nice. Better than coasting for miles at a time, and a little faster, too.

I''ll use the 50-11 on group rides on shallow downhills, pedaling very easy instead of coasting. Then the following riders don't have to check why I suddenly start coasting -- is it a downhill, or is the group slowing suddenly?

~~~

(But right now, I'm often using my 11-speed 14-32 combo cassette. It's great for fast rides, with 1-tooth shifts from 18 to 25 mph. That's where I'm working hard to hang on the group. It does spin out at 30 mph, though. And it's pretty annoying when riding around the 15 mph range, lots of front chainring shifts needed.)

Unlike Lance and his 7 Tour....oh, nevermind.

Cancellara broke his chain on the Koppenberg one time and shouldered his bike to the top... it was an unfortunate fluke, but it was a great photo op. No photos show what ring he was on at the time. Spartacus: legs stronger than steel chains.

http://d7ab823tjbf2qywyt3grgq63.wpen...nders_2009.jpg

I guess he rode his bike standing up as the gears were inappropriate.
When you stand up, it stresses components, especially the chain.

The hill doesn't look that steep, but their faces show a lot of struggle.

As a three time winner of both Paris-Roubaix and Tour of Flanders, along with a world championship, I figure he was a pretty intelligent rider. And he won the race in the video.

That never happens :lol:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8__uiMXcAAil9R.jpg

I prefer to use smaller chainwheels over doping.

"...Museeuw admits doping was ‘part of daily life’ when he raced"


Museeuw admits doping was ?part of daily life? when he raced